? Writing the kind of stories you like to read is a good way to start.My problem is that I read everything: SF, fantasy, horror, literary fiction, classical literature, mainstream, western, mystery, thriller, crime, etc. Everything except romance. And I've found that I most want to write what I'm reading. If I'm in reading Louis L'Amour novel, I want to write westerns. If I'm reading Stephen King, I want to write horror. If I'm reading Isaac Asimov . . . you know.
I write every morning. I don't know how I do this if I don't know what to write. But I do. I have a feeling that if I want to become a published writer, I need to focus on of the aforementioned genres (except for 'classical literature') and work on becoming proficient in it.
But I don't know which one I like best. What I've realized is that I don't particuarly like any one genre, but various authors and stories in each. I don't like SF per se, but I do like Asimov, Card, Heinlein, etc. So how do you pick a genre if you don't like any one genre?
Advice?
What would you do?
[This message has been edited by Garp (edited October 07, 2005).]
When your story's finished is the time to worry about what genre it'd be marketed as. Genre is first and foremost a marketing tool. Don't feel you have to pigeonhole yourself as an SF writer or a writer of Westerns who can never write anything else. Be a WRITER.
Try to identify what it is you like about the stories that particularly attract you. Clearly, it isn't the genre alone. Is it the style? The characters? The ideas? Find out what it is you most want to write about. Maybe it's conflict. Maybe it's people's inner lives. Maybe it's shiny guns. Who knows ? Writing the kind of stories you like to read is a good way to start.
If you end up writing in various genres, this is not a problem. Many writers use different names when publishing in different genres--the most obvious example is Iain Banks/Iain M. Banks. One writes mainstream and the other SF, although I confess I can never remember which is who. They are of course the same person 
.
Write as much as you can and define your style. It will happen one day that you notice you've been writing in xgenre for a month instead of any others and you can decide to focus on that.
It may be that you will be able to write many different stories in different genre's and getting many different fans that span the world. This is diversity, not a drawback.
Write and Enjoy!
I never know what I want to write until I write it. While I've managed to stay focused through one novel (sort of) I tend to stick to writing short stories. One idea; one theme; one main character; one genre.
I read a bit of everything, so I write a bit of ewverything and there is NOTHING wrong with that. If you want to expand your writing abilities then read as much of everything that you can. Then when you write, try combining the styles. Write a fantasy western, an historical mystery, or a sci-fi crime-thriller.
Just one question:
Do you finish the stories you start?
If you aren't finishing your stories, then there may be an issue with focus. If you are finishing your stories then try not to worry about it. Trying different styles and genres is one way you grow as a writer. Try to avoid being pigeon-holed. Once you are type-casted it's hard to break out of it.
I'm not going to give up on writing.
I'm not gonig to try harder to write fantasy.
I'm going to embrace my skills and try to stretch my abilities.
If I can be successful at Lit, Horror or fantasy, great! If I can be successful at all three, Super Wonderful and even better!
(note: successful is a loose term and definition changes regularly)
Genre should mean nothing to a writer, let the publishers and marketers worry about that stuff. Well, when you are ready to sell it, you should have an idea of what you are selling it as, but there is a chance the publisher will be of a different opinion and want to market what you thought was sci-fi as horror, etc...
Just write what your muses squeeze out of you.
The number one rule of writing is to write as much as possible. I do, and I have been for two years now.
The number one rule of publishing is to know your market. How can I know my market if I don't know what I what kind of fiction I want to focus on?
And let's get serious here. Writers are very aware of what genre they write. And for new writers, it's essential. You have to know where to market your work, how to market your work, and what's been done so you don't repeat stories. Or at least present them in a new way. Also, once you're labeled, that's it. I read somewhere that's the reason why OSC hasn't written any literary fiction, though he has some ideas. But not knowing OSC himself, I don't know if that's true or not. Even Dan Simmons, who does write in multiple genres, has noted how difficult it is. 1000 people read his SF, another 1000 read his horror, but only about 10 read both.
So the question I'm really asking is this: What kind of fiction can I focus on, excell at, that allows me the most creative freedom as well as gives me the most pleasure? I'm not asking you that, per se, but that's what I'm asking myself.
What I'm asking you is this: How can I answer that question?
Yes, I finish most of the stories I start, but not my novels. Why? Because I get side-tracked from what I'm reading.
Actually, the one kind of story I can rule out is hard SF because I don't like science enough to write hard SF.
As far as what is the common thread between what I read, it's this:
1. Novels, mostly. I don't like short stories too much.
2. I like big novels--Tolstoy, Dickens, Trollope, S. King, John Irving, Tad Williams, Tolkien, Jordan, Martin, etc., where a whole world is created.
3. I like good writing, a good prose style. It doesn't have to be Hemingway, but it must be interesting. This is why I can't stand John Grisham. I can't get past his pitiful, prosaic prose.
4. Good characterization is absolutely essential. Though I like Asimov, it would ahve been better for me to say that Card inspires me to write SF. I don't like flat characters, cardboard character, names on pages.
If I got serious about it, I could probably rule out westerns. The vast majority of L'Amour's novels could be set in the middle ages, and throw in some monsters and you'd have high fantasy.
I like high fantasy, but there's too much of it now, and most of it pales in compairsion to Tolkien (in my opinion). So I'd never write that. Unless I could out-do Tolkien.
[This message has been edited by Garp (edited October 07, 2005).]
I've been writing for 16 years or so and I, too, don't know what kind of writer I want to be...
... only I do.
I want to be a good writer.
I, too, have a wide taste in reading: crime, mainstream, SF, horror, etc. So don't sweat it - just write!
Look at folks like Dan Simmons and George R.R. Martin and Brian Aldiss and, well, tons of folks. These writers all simply write what they please. Let the marketing people worry about how to classify what you write. After all, that's what they get paid for!
[This message has been edited by Paul-girtbooks (edited October 07, 2005).]
Or, here, I'll pick for you: write urban fantasy. I like urban fantasies.
Oh, poor Dan Simmons. He can't get the 1990 people to read his entire catalog of work. Some people just can't get a break...
Seriously, though I have no credentials, my opinion is: Scatter your bread over many waters. See what returns to you. Sow your seed in every genre you can, for you don't know if your writing might suceed here or there, or whether in both you might find success.
[This message has been edited by ChrisOwens (edited October 07, 2005).]
There is a term for someone who does alll the market research possible to create the perfect artistic product that can be mass-marketed -- Sell out. Not that that is what you are trying to do, but it almost sounds that way...
Once you have a product to sell, then you can start thinking about how you want to market yourself. But first, you have to finish a novel or two before you can even get around to selling it.
I have written one novel. Unless I decide to someday re-write the whole thing, it will never see publication. The rest of what I have written are short stories. I wrote what could be called a horror story and sold it last year, but I have stories currently making the rounds that range from literary to historical fiction to all manner of spec-fic (space opera, sci-fi, dark humour/psuedo-horror).
Looking at the way I write and the stories I produce, I can't pick a genre that I most enjoy writing, but I can tell you the type of story I like to write...Character stories. Those also happen to be the stories I most enjoy reading. I love having characters that I can make deep connections to, get inside their heads, see things from their point of view. That is what I like, that is what I write.
There are many authors now who are cross genre in sci-fi and fantasy. Some have also seen success in other genre's, though not as many.
Some authors didn't see success in any other genre and stuck to what works for them and some didn't have the skill or enjoyment to write in a different genre.
The point is write. Don't waste time trying to lock your talent down to one thing yet. It may turn out that you can't get pubished in one or another genre. Cross that bridge when you get there.
Write contemporary fiction.
Avoid Mystery or Horror, they won't allow you to really go for the long novel.
Fantasy is okay, but its not where the highest financial potential is.
If you can write Literary Fiction, go for that.
Write the story. Decide what genre that story is in. Market it accordingly. Write another story. Rinse and repeat.
If people ask me what genre I write, I usually say "Science Fiction". It's handy to have a label, but I don't get guilt cramps if I cheat on SF and write something mainstream. Or a Fantasy story. Or whatever.
Once the STORY is written, THEN shop it around. There's a publisher for danged near anything out there.
Write the STORY first.
Why do I feel I need to choose just one genre? Mastery. It's that simple. The vast majority of great writers write in one genre. Very, very few span to more than one, and of those that do, even fewer are good in even genre they write in.
Also, part of being a professional writer is marketing. You have to market yourself. You can't let others do it for you. No one cares if your book succeeds as much as you do.
It's all about becoming a professional writer. I don't see writing as "expressing" myself. It's an art you can learn; an art you can master. Talent has little or nothing to do with it. But if you're going to be a professional--and that doesn't mean making loads of money, either--you have to gain mastery at what you do.
That's why Bo Jackson failed--he tried to be a master at both football and baseball. He could have been one of the greatest at one (but only one) if he had made a choice.
Premise: This is your idea seed, and it may evolve as you conplete the form.
Characters: Give names and a description of each one. This will also evolve.
Major Beats:
The major events of the story, numbered so you can rearrange them later.
Now you have a permanent record of a story you will probably write eventually. Do that any time you get an idea and you will have a stack of these. One of these outlines will be compelling and you will become passionate about it. That is the story you write first.
I write mostly SF but I occasionally write mainstream fiction if I find a compelling story.
Most writing skills are transferable from genre to genre, you know.
If you were arguing that, say, you couldn't decide whether to focus on writing haiku or novels, and argue that the skill sets are different for those forms, well, maybe you'd have something. But even then the only way to find out what you want to write and are good at etc is to get in there and, you know, write. Find out.
People have posted a number of examples of authors who work in numerous genres. You have only supported your hypothesis with a sports figure, and I agree that the skills required for sports are pretty highly specialized and probably don't transfer very well. It's a poor parallel with fiction.
Master *fiction* and let genre sort itself out.
quote:
SF, fantasy, horror, literary fiction, classical literature, mainstream, western, mystery, thriller, crime, etc. Everything except romance.
SF, fantasy and horror are all forms of Speculative Fiction.
Literary and mainstream are synonymous.
Classical literature is not a genre.
Westerns -- well, sci-fi is the new western; besides "western" is a milieu more than a genre.
Mystery, thriller, crime -- these are all sub-genres but are probably better described as plot devices. You can have any of these in any genre.
So basically your choice comes down to Spec. Fiction or Mainstream Lit. Cross-over between the two is difficult, but when you look at the masters, the basics (all of which Beth just listed) are present.
You like long, developed novels. All right. One way to ensure that you write that kind of story is to write a milieu based epic. Milieu is particularly condusive to Spec. Fic.
Otherwise, just write. Practice it. Try different things. Learn how to write first-person, present tense...Or just go do want you want...
).When you start to establish yourself as a writer, you're going to want to bust out of your genre no matter what it is, that's what I'm seeing from your "problem". The quotes are there to indicate that I don't think that it's a problem at all. Busting in will be hard, busting out will also be hard, but you'll do it anyway no matter which genre you choose to break into first.
Because that's the way you are. And I think it's a good thing.
And Robyn Hood, your post helped, too. I suppose you could simply divide all fiction into fantastic fiction and non-fantastic fiction. That's a very interesting way to look at it. I need to mull that one over.
By the way, is ROBYN HOOD you pen name? Do you write SF/F? Do you know there is a writer named Robin Hobb who writes SF/F?
[This message has been edited by Garp (edited October 07, 2005).]
[This message has been edited by Garp (edited October 07, 2005).]
[This message has been edited by Beth (edited October 07, 2005).]
If I were to take Robert Nowall's advice, the stack of classical literature/mainstream/literary fiction would be highest. Of couse, novels such as WAR AND PEACE and DAVID COPPERFIELD are higher than a dozen paperbacks from the Golden Age of Science Fiction.
If I were to count them individually, according to genre, classical literature/mainstream/literary fiction would still be the highest.
But if I were to divide them simply between fantastic fiction and, for a lack of a better word, realistic fiction, I think, though I'm not sure, that fantastic fiction would be highest. But not by much; it'd be pretty close.
Anyway, that's all for tonight.
Part of business is making sure you don't put the cart before the horse.
Good luck.
(By the way, check out Kay Hooper's bibliography some time, and then come back and tell us writers can only succeed in one genre)
[This message has been edited by BuffySquirrel (edited October 08, 2005).]
2. Yes, of course, classical literature means old literature. What else would it mean?
3. Who the hell is Kay Hooper? I think I made my point. And why would I write romance when I don't even read it?
quote:
3. Who the hell is Kay Hooper? I think I made my point.
Well, if your point was that you are both rude and incapable of using a search engine, then yes, you made it very successfully . Kay Hooper is a professional author who has had books published in various genres.
Hope Kathleen doesn't mind me using tinyurl (Amazon links are always so loooooooong).
quote:
And why would I write romance when I don't even read it?
Let's see. You wrote:
quote:
It's not about what I want to write---because I want to write EVERYTHING---it's about how I want to break into the business.
I think that answers the question, really.
Garp, snide comments and insulting people tends to burn bridges. If you wish to build relationships with people who have the experience to help you, you might try saying: "Thank you for your opinion. I shall consider it. I appreciate your effort to help."
It will go much farther.
*sigh* Why do I feel like a broken record at times?
[This message has been edited by Elan (edited October 08, 2005).]
I suppose that FN fic could be fiction featuring the many fine products of Fabrique Nationale, but Beth's expectations are closer to my intended meaning.
"Oh, Derek!" said Clarissa. "You're so brave, fighting off those evil robot monkeys!"
Derek wiped the sweat off his tanned and manly brow. "It's the least I could do for Fabrique Nationale," he told her. "It's everything to me. I just wish that I could have saved the portrait!"
"We'll have it repainted," Clarissa said, bravely.
quote:
(By the way, check out Kay Hooper's bibliography some time, and then come back and tell us writers can only succeed in one genre)3. Who the hell is Kay Hooper? I think I made my point. And why would I write romance when I don't even read it?
Ok then, Garp, ever hear of Orson Scott Card? That's why he's my favorite author---I've loved his work in every genre he writes in. In my eyes, he has mastered them all. Maybe it's a basic step like mastering the craft of writing, and that will translate into any genre you decide to jump into.
[This message has been edited by Ahavah (edited October 08, 2005).]
[This message has been edited by Corky (edited October 10, 2005).]
quote:
The vast majority of great writers write in one genre. Very, very few span to more than one, and of those that do, even fewer are good in even genre they write in.
Iain Banks?
Very, very, highly regarded for both SF and for LitFic.
Note that he makes sure his "reading public" (and the bookshops) know which genre any given book is in, by whether he includes his middle initial or not in his name.
I suspect that many authors write only in one genre because they're interested primarily in one genre. Maybe that's what they know, or what they've always loved.
Me, I write primarily fantasy (though I like to think it drifts towards both historical and literary fiction), but sometimes I write SF, and in shorts I seem to have a definite tendency to veer into horror. And I have given some thought to crime.
Of course, I'm unpublished, and probably crap, so take no notice of my advice...
quote:
And I have given some thought to crime.
You'd be better off sticking to your writing.
Thanks for the kind words.It was meant as a warning not to take what I say as gospel, compared to more experienced (and more published) writers on here. And it was only mild (and humourous) self-disparagement. If I really thought what I wrote was crap, I weouldn't be here. I think I can write some things well, but I don't believe I write well enough.
Yet.
And Spaceman - I laughed.
But, hey, I suspect there are a lot more people who successfully make a living out of crime than successfully make a living out of writing... gotta be tempting...
And then there are those who do both. Die, Jeffrey Archer, die!
[This message has been edited by tchernabyelo (edited October 11, 2005).]
At least that is something a tech. writing instructor once told me.
Well, the only reason to seek mastery is to seek recognition and recognition is a measure of the audience. Mainstream/Contemporary/Literary fiction has the highest audience and thus the most recognition.
A rennaisance writer (one that is great with all genres) is indeed a rarity. So why even try, right?
Now, that we have settled on the mainstream, there is no reason not to include fantastic or Sci/fi elements.
You can always use a different pen name when your muse throws you a curve.
quote:
the only reason to seek mastery is to seek recognition
Not true. Some of us seek mastery because we are anal-retentive perfectionists who shake our fists at mediocrity.
Mastery traditionally connotes recognition. (I.E. via a guild), in this case the recognition of other writers and readers.
Perfection is simply the state of being without fault.
In the case of the art of writing, perfection is impossible. While grammatical perfection may be attainable, creative perfection is still subjective and thus imperfectable.
There is nothing wrong with being a perfectionist, but a writer can be perfect in their style, grammar, etc and never be recognized as a master. Several of the writers recognized for their mastery in literature were imperfect grammatically or stylistically.
In other words, by practicing writing in different ways, styles and genres one increases the chance for becoming a master. Of course, this implies that the person spends time writing and reading and critiquing and studying. Mostly though, this is by writing. Everything and anything and learning from successes and mistakes.
True, such mastery will usually be recognized by somebody eventually...though in the wild world of the internet it would be quite possible for someone to be spreading anonymous but masterfully written memes through a variety of seemingly unconnected sites (and no I don't know anyone doing this). The point is that the purpose of gaining such a mastery would have nothing to do with having gaining personal recognition or even having the mastery itself recognized at large.
On a different note, I've found that many of my favorite books become even better the more I learn. So that's another (completely non-sinister) reason for mastery aside from gaining recognition. That's not just true of writing. Lot's of different kinds of mastery enhance the master's ability to appreciate and enjoy another's art.