Alcatraz *SPOLIERS*

[EUOL]

Please post general responses to the book here--things you think might spark discussion, and therefore (hopefully) help me make a better book out of the novel.

In answer to a question Ookla asked on the other thread, Yes, I've read Lemony Snicket.

I've recently been reading a lot of YA and middle-grade, something I had always wanted to do, but never really had a good excuse for.  As I read, Lemony Snicket stood out to me as probably the best line-by-line written of the works (aside from Harry Potter.)

I had a problem with it, though.  I have a lot of trouble latching onto the characters in the LS books.  I think that's because the level of absurdity is SO high.  Also, there doesn't seem to be character progression, or even really progression through plotting.  In other words, the books are amazingly good little comedic essays, but they just aren't as good in the 'storytelling' department.

I also read Artemis Fowl.  This had better storytelling, but the writing just wasn't (in my mind) up to the caliber that it could have reached.  There was some very nice character development, but the plotting was just a tad weak.

So, my thought was "Why don't I plot something like Artemis Fowl, then try and make it a little bit zany, a little more like Lemony Snicket."  Then, to try and make certain it wasn't TOO derivative, I put the Brandon stamp on it--i.e. a cleverish magic system, some fun characters, and some puzzle-style plot twists.

So, that was my philosophy for this book.  I realize that it's going to be rough in parts still.  I wrote and edited it in eighteen days!  Also, I worry that in places it sounds a little TOO much like Lemony Snicket.  (Personally, I think this is a bigger problem in the beginning--for instance, the author introduction to chapter two--than it is in later chapters.)  

Advice, comments, and identification of problem spots would be appreciated.

[Chimera]

DO NOT READ UNLESS YOU HAVE FINISHED THE BOOK.

The ending will be ruined for you if you read on.

Are you sure you've finished the book?

THIS IS YOUR LAST CHANCE TO STOP READING IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY FINISHED ALCATRAZ.

Okay, if the ending is spoiled for you after all those very clear warnings, than it's your own fault.

So, people who've read it, what do you think of the ending? I was discussing it with EUOL yesterday, and he already heard my views, so I think he'd like to hear some others. How did you react to the book once you realized that the scene promised in the very first line of the novel does not occur in the book? What was your response as a reader?

[EUOL]

Here's something I need your help on.  So please, anyone who's read the book, give me advice here.

My agent really wants me to put the book into first person.  He thinks this would help it have its own voice, and let me shrug off the Lemony Snicket influence.  Now, if I do this, it's probably going to change the tone of the book drastically.  I think I can maintain all of my favorite quips, but the air of the 'author' will be gone, instead replaced with a more 'storyteller at the campfire' feel.  

The voice would probably grow to be less stiff and formal, becoming more conversational.  This would certainly help me stand out from Snicket, and it would give a stronger presence to Alcatraz in the book.  However, it would certainly be a change.  What do you all think?

[Peter Ahlstrom]

Well, point of view in your narrative things is a problem. Usually they're in third-person "the author," but sometimes you do use "I" and "my" etc: it needs to be more consistent.

However...the Lemony Snickett books ARE in first person! (For example, "a town quite near you has enacted a law preventing me from coming within 5 miles of city limits" (rough quote).) So how would putting your book in first person take you further away from the unfortunate events books? I think using the "the author" and "writing books about yourself in third person" lines helps to differentiate yourself from Snicket. But there are a few places where I thought it was dangerously close, and will detail in the detailed comments.

But maybe you should provide a small rewriting example to compare?

[EDIT:]
Errr, I think I misread that completely. You mean doing the whole thing from Alcatraz's first person point of view, NOT from a indeterminately far-future disguised Alcatraz's point of view. Well, it would definitely make it entirely different from Snicket. But it seems like it would be an entirely different book from what you've got, which isn't a bad book. Would it really make it better enough, and avoid problems, to warrant the change? That's a good question.

First person is hard to do. Have you done anything in first person other than the hardboiled technopunk story? That worked well in my opinion, but this is a very different situation. Anyway, you currently have a narrator that knows a great deal more than the main character, and that would be lost. Well...you could conceivably have your story switching between a far-future I and a just-past-the-moment I, but that would be confusing.

Umm...I don't want to think about it any more right now.

[EUOL]

You've got it now, Ookla.  (And, I realize there were a couple of POV errors in the original author-interjections.)

Will changing the narrative to first person make it better.  I don't think so.

Will it make it feel less like Lemony Snicket?  Yes.  

So, is the change in tense (which I think will weaken the story just slightly) worth the added feel of originality the book will have?  My agent thinks so.  I'd like to know what you all think.

Personally, I don't really like first person.  Maybe it's just because I've read fewer books that use it.  Either way, I'm not sold on the changes to the book this will make.  

However, I think my agent has something of a point.  He thinks that the author interjections interfere with the storytelling, and that a first person transformation would meld the two much better.  

I've polished off two chapters in the first person, and am sending them to you two.  Let me know what you think.

[MsFish]

You have no idea how tempting it is to read this thread.  

Where's that file, EUOL?

[EUOL]

Sent just a few seconds before I saw your post, actually.

[MsFish]

aHA.  Yay.  

[fuzzyoctopus]

I love first person. Maybe that's because my favorite books ever are written in it.  But I think it would help a LOT.
Past that.... man, I really don't like most of the first half.  Do you want me to believe you're actually writing a book or not?  It's too goofy.  It's a full-on parody up until the last 5 or 6 chapters.
And I think that first person would remove a lot of the bits that make it so..... Piers Anthony.

[Chimera]

See, that's where we differ, Fuzzy. I love the quirky narrator. Of course, I am an avid Lemony Snicket fan, and enjoy movies like Monty Python and the Holy Grail and The Emperor's New Groove. That is where I place the humor in this book--postmodern, kind of absurdist, always poking fun at and drawing attention to itself. Oh, and from the little I know of Hitch-hikers Guide, I'd put it in the same category as well. This isn't a deep ponderous book, but it is funny and quirky while also being sincere. I would really be sad to see the narrator in 3rd person go--I think a lot would be lost. And I hate to think that no one can ever write in this quirky way again because it's been done by Lemony Snicket. That said, I do agree with Ookla that there were some points that it was too similar--and I also detailed those in the manuscript I wil be giving directly to EUOL.

But, I haven't read the revised chapters in first person (my project later today), so I will reserve further judgement until I have done so.

[fuzzyoctopus]

Oh don't get me wrong, I enjoy the quirky narrator. I laughed out loud in several places (which will be marked in my notes EUOL.) I just don't think it's publishable the way it is because the narration clashes so much with the any seriousness the story has.  I can't get into it because it bounces back between two personalities.

[Chimera]

I just don't think it's publishable the way it is because the narration clashes so much with the any seriousness the story has.  I can't get into it because it bounces back between two personalities.

I can see your point. You should get EUOL to send you the first few chapters he wrote in first person. It seems that it will solve a lot of the problem of bouncing back and forth between serious and silly. I think I still prefer the quirky 3rd person narrator, but like I said I enjoy that sort of humor. The voice works well in first person, though, so I think it is just stubbornness that makes me cling to the third person.

Read the revision in first person and see if that solves the problem while maintaining the humor.

[origamikaren]

I just read the 1st person re-write, and I didn't like it.  It felt flatter.  The first was derivative of one relatively new style, yes, but this felt like a retread of a thousand stories from the slush pile back at the Edge.   This is not meant as a reflection on the author, but as a comment on first person in general.  

First person, unless it is done REALLY well, is annoying for me to read.  It's even more annoying to read if it's third person transposed into first person.  It's meant to give a greater sense of immediacy, but to me it seems artificial, and pushes me back a step.

I DO think that the author interjections work better in first person -- perhaps because it's less of a stretch for me to believe that the author is actually sitting there writing it.  Unless you build a strong case for why a person with so much going on in his life would take the time to sit and write such a long work, it just doesn't ring true.  Even Princess Diaries, which I've just gotten through four volumes of, stretches that believability just a bit -- there just aren't enough hours in her day to write all that.  

If Alcatraz is writing from years later, then how does he remember every detail so clearly?  I can't even remember that much detail a week later.  An omnicient narrator removes that question, and that's why it's used so much.  

I'd suggest a compromise -- make the Storyteller be first person, and the story third.  There's lots of precedent for this -- take Kipling for example. You can have the Storyteller be Alcatraz, or rather, somebody pretending not to be Alcatraz, and that would give him an excuse to be telling the story in third person.  To make it more chummy, you could have the Storyteller admit to knowing Alcatraz at the time, and therefore be privy to many of the details and his emotional state etc...

Anyway that's my take on it.

[origamikaren]

So, people who've read it, what do you think of the ending? ... How did you react to the book once you realized that the scene promised in the very first line of the novel does not occur in the book? What was your response as a reader?

I thought, "Oh, that sneaky Author,  he threw in another hook.  You just can't trust them can you?"  I thought it was funny, if a little underhanded.  It certainly didn't leave me unfulfilled.  

[fuzzyoctopus]

Well as the story got past the climax and they escaped the library I was thinking, "Oh, well good for them and HEY. No altars?  Ok, well that just figures."