thoughtful(*All reviews are matters of opinion. One man's trash is another man's treasure is a third man's raw materials for their planet-buster earthquake machine. Please do not yell at reviewers, unless the reviewers are saying things like "and this book is so bad that it proves the author likes to microwave kittens." If I am accused of being a kitten microwaving fiend, feel free to step in.)
I did not meet this reviewer's expectations, and my ending did not meet his standards for "this is how a book should end." That is fair, and I am sorry, although I stand by the shape of the story. I do find it interesting that there's often this assumption that a) things are artificially inflated into trilogies, and b) my publisher forced me to end Deadline the way that I did. So I wanted to state two things, for people who may have been wondering:
This was always a trilogy. It's a trilogy not because people expected it to be, but because that was the shape the story took. I started writing Feed (then Newsflesh) as a stand-alone book, and watched as it turned into something longer, a story with a beginning, middle, and end. Acts one, two, and three. We went to Orbit with three books, one finished, one half-finished, and one heavily outlined. The next project I'm planning to undertake as Mira Grant is a duology, rather than the admittedly more marketable trilogy. Why? Because that's the shape of the story.
The ending of Deadline (then The Mourning Edition) was always exactly as written. Why the stress? Because when you read the book, I want you to understand that the book's last line was in the original pitch package. Orbit had absolutely nothing to do with that ending. If anything, they might have encouraged me to provide something a little more concrete, and a little less "now is the time that the house lights come up and we all go to intermission."
The Newsflesh trilogy is a Schwartz musical, not a Sondheim; it's a 1980s horror film, not a 1950s monster mash. That's just how the story is shaped. I'm really sorry if I let any of you down, or if you don't like this shape. But it was my choice, not my publisher's, and it was dictated to me by the way the story needed to go. I will always go the way the story needs to go, even if that way isn't the one that's guaranteed to make the most people happy.
Treasure, trash, or death ray. It's all in the eye of the beholder.
September 27 2011, 21:45:21 UTC 5 years ago
for one, privilege check and for another what is this deal with having to identify with the protagonists of a book in order to find the experience enjoyable? i don't get it. that is the weirdest thing to me. (i guess i'm not identifying with this type of reader)
i mean, okay, sure maybe you'll identify with certain characters more than others, but i've never had to identify with a character in order to like them and sometimes i have identified with a character (we share a truly annoying characteristic) and not liked them AT ALL.
September 28 2011, 08:37:05 UTC 5 years ago
And why do you have to identify with a protagonist?
Shaun was seriously messed up yes, but within the confines of his environment I find it entirely understandable. Anyone who had to kill their own sister (even without their rather warped relationship) would be affected, and surely not in a good way.
The whole book was an inevitable slide to what happened to Shaun at the end (what happened next was unexpected but when you think about it, also likely inevitable in the world of Shaun)
I knew it was the middle book of a trilogy, and the very last movement in the final act was an interesting twist, but it also sets it up (with Shauns variation) for Book 3
It does suffer a bit of middlebookitis - where the purpose of book 2 is to extend the story in book 1 and setup for book 3 - and not necessarily stand alone on its own merits.
The constant lurch from one disaster to another was wearying, added to Shauns habit of recklessly diving into a situation merely to provoke a reaction - an extension of the 'poking the zombie with a stick' Irwin mentality. I can cope with a certain amount of that, but an entire plotline based on those principles, spiralling down into self destruction made it not necessarily the easiest book to read.
I felt similar while reading Feed, it was clearly moving to a destructive ending, tho I was taken by surprise by who and how - it held the dramatic tension well.
But Deadline felt like watching a car crash in slow motion, you know its going to happen but are helpless to stop it, not the most comfortable reading matter.
So yes I get that it may not be everyones cup of tea, but for me its an incredibly brave and bold writing style. And an innovative story and engaging characters.