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, 19:34:11 UTC 5 years ago
The carpet smelled of cigarette smoke, despite being a non-smoking room: fact.
It can be done; it's harder with entertainment, though, and I don't think divorcing fact from opinion is always optimal, even when it's possible. Especially with books/movies/TV, opinions matter.
September 28 2011, 10:20:40 UTC 5 years ago
Where things go wrong is when a reviewer mistakes opinion for fact; it's fine to say 'this didn't work for me because' but not 'this is wrong.' Unless of course it is something that is factually wrong (it would be so easy to rant about a recent multi-award winning novel here but I'll resist the temptation. Aren't I nice?!)
On the other hand 'I think' and 'in my opinion' should be used sparingly - if you wrote it most people will know it is your opinion (though that also depends on the tone. I have read critics where you know intellectually that it is their opinion, but the way it is written sounds more like 'this is what I think and anyone who disagrees is a drooling idiot.'
I suspect I am now arguing with myself. This happens more often than is probably good for my mental health...
September 28 2011, 14:23:53 UTC 5 years ago