I was talking with my SO (Significant Other) today and I had one of those little epiphanies about the 'All Powerful Hero' and why it's probably popular to write and not very fun to read... Granted, I don't assume I'm making some huge logic leap no one else has ever done, but it just kind of hit me today while we were talking about it. Playing the 'All Powerful Hero' is fun. After a hard day or a long day, being powerful and able to breeze through enemies and challenges is great. It's good for the mind because of a hard day of having to deal with one thing after another that you can't breeze through. It's nice to just feel like you can do anything, accomplish anything, and it's not hard because in that moment 'you're awesome' and no one can touch you. So I can totally get why people love doing the 'Elder Scrolls' kind of hero that's the greatest mage/warrior/rogue/dragonborn/whatever that has ever been and everyone respects and loves you (or fears you as your fantasy might be). It's an appealing way to forget for a while what a pain in the ass life itself can be. However, reading about the All Powerful Hero is not fun. Why? Well, because normally my day involves me feeling like the little guy, the one that has to play nice, grin and bear it, and in general just kind of gets taken advantage of. I'm sure a lot of people feel that way in a lot of jobs; it feels like you do all the work, deal with all the problems, and it's the higher-ups that get to benefit. It's rough because in the real world there's not really an easy way to get to be the boss or beat the boss or advance quickly (in most cases). When I read, I want to read about the 'Little Guy' that does get to do all that. I want to feel better and hopeful about that sort of thing, I think. I want to smile because "hey, if this little guy can do it, maybe I can too." I read for a different reason and a different feeling than I play a game. Apples and oranges for me personally, but I assume I'm not alone. Reading a book about some super powered guy walking all over the competition, winning all the prizes, just makes me think of a rich boss gushing about buying yet another car or something. It wasn't hard for them to spend that money, it wasn't an effort, and now them patting their own back just feels like rubbing it in the face of all the little guys they stood on to get there. So that All Powerful Hero just seems like a jerk. Reading about a Little Guy overcoming something, struggling, and finally getting to beat out 'The Big Boss' is nice because hey, wouldn't I love to be able to do that? It's not near as viable to me (because you know...stabbing or challenging them into mortal combat isn't generally accepted in most places) but it's a nice feeling anyway to read about them winning because they worked hard to earn it. Again, just my two cents and late night rambling when I probably should be in bed. I just felt like sharing it because thinking about the Land made me remember the conversation I had earlier.
Authors need to listen to their editors and give their suggestions and opinions weight. And editors absolutely cannot ever pander to authors or be blind yes-men (and women), because that's not what we're supposed to be doing. Our entire job is to make our authors' books better. That's why crowdsourcing editing to fans kinda grinds my gears, a bit. Copyedits and proofing? Sure - have at it. Your results may vary, depending on the crowd involved, but it's not going to be as bad as a completely unedited manuscript. But relying on betas and Patreons who are already rabid fans for developmental and substantive editing, especially when you've gone out of your way to build a cult of personality, is just a recipe for a garbage book no matter how you spin it. A good editor will separate their personal taste from their professional recommendations. Even the best beta reader or Patreon will be biased, and while that's helpful - to an extent - it's not something that you want when you're looking to improve your book. I like to look at it this way: If you have ten beta readers, six of them will just say "I absolutely loved it!" and not give you any reason why, or that they loved everything about it. Three of them probably won't respond with any feedback at all, or will respond with "I hated it and it's absolute unreadable garbage." And if you're really, tremendously lucky, the tenth person might give you a nugget or two of solid critical feedback that you can incorporate into your manuscript. The way to get good, usable feedback, is to either pay a professional for it, or avoid selection bias by choosing betas from a population that doesn't include people who love or hate your already-existing body of work. Kong either has family and friends read his manuscripts, or he relies on his Patreon fan club for his editing. There's no other explanation that I can think of for the quality of the end product. I think what I dislike the most about his books is that they aren't an absolute dumpster fire. They're mediocre in a way that I can see easy fixes for, and that just gets under my skin somehow. It would be one thing if they were just absolute dumpster fires, but they aren't. I draw the line at reading 2200 pages of Kong's self-congratulatory circlejerking, so I haven't read book 7 and likely won't read any more of the series as books are released. Now, if he were to pay me to read it, that would be another thing entirely. I like to think that I'm fairly good at putting my personal feelings aside when I've got my editing hat on.
I totally agree. I've tried to have people I know read over my stuff and give me feedback. It's almost always completely worthless in a technical sense. Like I appreciate the support, but man, I want them to rip me a new one. I want them to go "this is a plot hole" or "I didn't like this because-" or something. Anything more productive than "oh, it was great! You know your stuff is good!". Okay, actually, no, I don't. And even if I do know it's "good", I want it to be better. I can't improve unless I know what's wrong and I'm not near vain enough to assume my writing is flawless and my characterization is perfect or any of that jazz. At best, I might ask them to scan over it and tell me about any glaring misspellings, etc. but I've given up on getting a strong critique because I know they want to be nice to me. I wish they could understand that it would be much nicer for my personal growth if they were much more blunt! I've stopped trying to put them in that position though. I've realized it's not really fair and I don't want my friends to feel pressured into it. That's very true as well and I agree that's what makes it so frustrating. The books could be so much better. It really wouldn't take much. The bones are good; it just needs a tough editor and a willing author and they could go from mediocre to a really, really nice LitRPG series. If they were just trash heaps, I could just snort and move on and forget about it. The fact there's some glimmers of a good story in there makes it worse to see it, well, wasted. At least in my view.
Just a thought: If a successful author is writing in a way that others find lazy or terrible, the people giving critiques should do it better and prove the author wrong. ...Otherwise, they might look kind of silly. It's easy to throw shade on the internet. Meanwhile, creating something people like is hard. I've see a lot of people dump on Twilight--hell, I'm still one of them...but Stephenie Meyer is going to give -0- fucks about anyone else's opinion. She wrote a story that has appealed to millions of people, spawned movies, and she now sleeps on a bed of diamonds. I didn't really understand how profound this was before I became a professional artist. RE: This thread-- To anyone who is frustrated with literature out there right now, go write your own. I don't mean that dismissively, I meant it seriously. This is literally what I did, and now I'm full time. If enough people feel the same way you do about stuff you've read, you will find success. -BC
I was in an authors group where we shared and read manuscripts for each other. Got a lot of really productive feedback from it. Learned a lot of stuff along the way as well. Other authors can be great at tearing about somebody else's work as long as everybody understands the reasons and that it is for the good of the final product.
I always find this fact comforting. Sometimes I look at my WIP and wonder where the hell the market for it is. Then I remember that I thought Twilight was garbage yet millions loved it...so what do I know about the market? Not much apparently, hahaha. Maybe I am wrong about my book and I should just damn the torpedos.
