Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

SlyTF1 wrote:

Blast Cannon wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

Blast Cannon wrote:I simply can't understand why you all continue to engage with him. He's clearly a lonely neckbeard whose only joy in life is to maintain an Internet persona which is probably the direct opposite to what he is in real life. I seem to remember him saying that he works at a cinema? He'll probably reply to this post chewing on the popcorn he retrieves from his hair each night. Ignore the prat and he'll soon get bored.

And all you can do is hide behind a computer and attempt to label me with false assumptions. You don't know me.

What film would you recommend I go and see this Friday?

Mad Max.

The Mel Gibson version was shite. Is this one any better?

Blast Cannon wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

Blast Cannon wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

Blast Cannon wrote:I simply can't understand why you all continue to engage with him. He's clearly a lonely neckbeard whose only joy in life is to maintain an Internet persona which is probably the direct opposite to what he is in real life. I seem to remember him saying that he works at a cinema? He'll probably reply to this post chewing on the popcorn he retrieves from his hair each night. Ignore the prat and he'll soon get bored.

And all you can do is hide behind a computer and attempt to label me with false assumptions. You don't know me.

What film would you recommend I go and see this Friday?

Mad Max.

The Mel Gibson version was ****. Is this one any better?

Never saw the old ones. I liked this one a lot, probably not as much as everyone else on the planet, but I liked it.

SlyTF1 wrote:I have six short stories. I want to publish each one individually, then combine them into one collection. That'd be the "novel," so to speak.

Publishing houses consider that an anthology, not a novel--we've been through this before.

Do all your stories have the same protagonist? If so, try to either pick one story that has the most potential for expansion and maybe work the other stories into it in some way. I'd be willing to read your stories and maybe give you some suggestions, but I've got a couple of 3d modeling commissions to complete, so I can't spare the time.

Anyways, if they're different protagonists, then, again, pick one with the the most potential for development.

On second thought, you might be able to weave all six stories into a novel after all, but they must be set in the same timeline and continuity, and all the stories must have one focused theme and premise. Mark Stiegler's Earthweb tells a single story from the POV's of at least 6 main characters, each with their own character arc and development within the same story. You should try to get your hands on his book and use that as an example.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I have six short stories. I want to publish each one individually, then combine them into one collection. That'd be the "novel," so to speak.

Publishing houses consider that an anthology, not a novel--we've been through this before.

Do all your stories have the same protagonist? If so, try to either pick one story that has the most potential for expansion and maybe work the other stories into it in some way. I'd be willing to read your stories and maybe give you some suggestions, but I've got a couple of 3d modeling commissions to complete, so I can't spare the time.

Anyways, if they're different protagonists, then, again, pick one with the the most potential for development.

On second thought, you might be able to weave all six stories into a novel after all, but they must be set in the same timeline and continuity, and all the stories must have one focused theme and premise. Mark Stiegler's Earthweb tells a single story from the POV's of at least 6 main characters, each with their own character arc and development within the same story. You should try to get your hands on his book and use that as an example.

They're about different protagonists, the timeline is the same, the continuity is the same, and the each one of the character's stories connects with one another. Combined, they take place over about a 35 year span, though. They all have different themes for the most part, but they're still relevant to one another. There are two specific characters who are prevalent through all six stories, and you learn more about them as the stories progress. They're the ones who tie it all together.

Ooh, I forgot to mention, one of the stories (of one of the 2 prevalent characters I mentioned) will probably be closer to novella length, the way I'm writing that one. The story I have planned for that character is pretty large. So...

Fun fact: that story is actually going to be based off of a Transformers fan story I wrote years ago for the origins of Optimus Prime. I never got close to releasing it or anything. It was just a way to pass time in school. I even wrote two whole sequels.

SlyTF1 wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I have six short stories. I want to publish each one individually, then combine them into one collection. That'd be the "novel," so to speak.

Publishing houses consider that an anthology, not a novel--we've been through this before.

Do all your stories have the same protagonist? If so, try to either pick one story that has the most potential for expansion and maybe work the other stories into it in some way. I'd be willing to read your stories and maybe give you some suggestions, but I've got a couple of 3d modeling commissions to complete, so I can't spare the time.

Anyways, if they're different protagonists, then, again, pick one with the the most potential for development.

On second thought, you might be able to weave all six stories into a novel after all, but they must be set in the same timeline and continuity, and all the stories must have one focused theme and premise. Mark Stiegler's Earthweb tells a single story from the POV's of at least 6 main characters, each with their own character arc and development within the same story. You should try to get your hands on his book and use that as an example.

They're about different protagonists, the timeline is the same, the continuity is the same, and the each one of the character's stories connects with one another. Combined, they take place over about a 35 year span, though. They all have different themes for the most part, but they're still relevant to one another. There are two specific characters who are prevalent through all six stories, and you learn more about them as the stories progress. They're the ones who tie it all together.

Doesn't seem to be any problems in rewriting this into a novel. The 35 year span isn't a issue at all, as long as you know how to do some narrative condensing and flashbacks when necessary. Flashbacks should be used VERY sparingly, though. They detract from the current flow of the story, and makes the reader wonder why he's reading about something that happened ages ago.

The difference in themes can be remedied if you relegate certain characters as side characters, and don't focus on them too much. Maybe turn them into sidekicks or allies of the main character(s) and keep them in the periphery--essential to plot progression, but otherwise "ignored".

SlyTF1 wrote:Ooh, I forgot to mention, one of the stories (of one of the 2 prevalent characters I mentioned) will probably be closer to novella length, the way I'm writing that one. The story I have planned for that character is pretty large. So...

Fun fact: that story is actually going to be based off of a Transformers fan story I wrote years ago for the origins of Optimus Prime. I never got close to releasing it or anything. It was just a way to pass time in school. I even wrote two whole sequels.

Well, then you could use that character's storyline as the main one, and weave the others' stories into that. And it that character has the potential to be an interesting main character, then make him the star of the show.

As for fan fic, I find myself doing something similar. The difference is, I go for original characters (so there's more space for development and creative license), and if they show potential, I try to use them as characters in my own stories.

And if you're wondering why I haven't actually posted any of my own writings, well, I'm an incurable OCD case. A 17-year old novel that's been (shameless plug: activated) mostly praised by many a workshop member at the dearly departed Novel Advice website is still missing an ending, because I wanted it to be "perfect".

And don't bother googling Novel Advce. It's been dead for ages, but anyone who's been writing long enough should remember it fondly as a wellspring of literary information.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I have six short stories. I want to publish each one individually, then combine them into one collection. That'd be the "novel," so to speak.

Publishing houses consider that an anthology, not a novel--we've been through this before.

Do all your stories have the same protagonist? If so, try to either pick one story that has the most potential for expansion and maybe work the other stories into it in some way. I'd be willing to read your stories and maybe give you some suggestions, but I've got a couple of 3d modeling commissions to complete, so I can't spare the time.

Anyways, if they're different protagonists, then, again, pick one with the the most potential for development.

On second thought, you might be able to weave all six stories into a novel after all, but they must be set in the same timeline and continuity, and all the stories must have one focused theme and premise. Mark Stiegler's Earthweb tells a single story from the POV's of at least 6 main characters, each with their own character arc and development within the same story. You should try to get your hands on his book and use that as an example.

They're about different protagonists, the timeline is the same, the continuity is the same, and the each one of the character's stories connects with one another. Combined, they take place over about a 35 year span, though. They all have different themes for the most part, but they're still relevant to one another. There are two specific characters who are prevalent through all six stories, and you learn more about them as the stories progress. They're the ones who tie it all together.

Doesn't seem to be any problems in rewriting this into a novel. The 35 year span isn't a issue at all, as long as you know how to do some narrative condensing and flashbacks when necessary. Flashbacks should be used VERY sparingly, though. They detract from the current flow of the story, and makes the reader wonder why he's reading about something that happened ages ago.

The difference in themes can be remedied if you relegate certain characters as side characters, and don't focus on them too much. Maybe turn them into sidekicks or allies of the main character(s) and keep them in the periphery--essential to plot progression, but otherwise "ignored".

No, no flashbacks or anything. The easiest way for me to explain it is like this; my second story takes place a year before the first; my third story takes place 2 weeks after the first; my fourth story takes place 35 years before that; the fifth takes place 5 years after that; and the sixth takes place, I want to say, just 2 years before the first.

Think of it a bit like Pulp Fiction. One movie, several different stories shown out of chronological order, but they all still fit to make up one complete package.

SlyTF1 wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I have six short stories. I want to publish each one individually, then combine them into one collection. That'd be the "novel," so to speak.

Publishing houses consider that an anthology, not a novel--we've been through this before.

Do all your stories have the same protagonist? If so, try to either pick one story that has the most potential for expansion and maybe work the other stories into it in some way. I'd be willing to read your stories and maybe give you some suggestions, but I've got a couple of 3d modeling commissions to complete, so I can't spare the time.

Anyways, if they're different protagonists, then, again, pick one with the the most potential for development.

On second thought, you might be able to weave all six stories into a novel after all, but they must be set in the same timeline and continuity, and all the stories must have one focused theme and premise. Mark Stiegler's Earthweb tells a single story from the POV's of at least 6 main characters, each with their own character arc and development within the same story. You should try to get your hands on his book and use that as an example.

They're about different protagonists, the timeline is the same, the continuity is the same, and the each one of the character's stories connects with one another. Combined, they take place over about a 35 year span, though. They all have different themes for the most part, but they're still relevant to one another. There are two specific characters who are prevalent through all six stories, and you learn more about them as the stories progress. They're the ones who tie it all together.

Doesn't seem to be any problems in rewriting this into a novel. The 35 year span isn't a issue at all, as long as you know how to do some narrative condensing and flashbacks when necessary. Flashbacks should be used VERY sparingly, though. They detract from the current flow of the story, and makes the reader wonder why he's reading about something that happened ages ago.

The difference in themes can be remedied if you relegate certain characters as side characters, and don't focus on them too much. Maybe turn them into sidekicks or allies of the main character(s) and keep them in the periphery--essential to plot progression, but otherwise "ignored".

No, no flashbacks or anything. The easiest way for me to explain it is like this; my second story takes place a year before the first; my third story takes place 2 weeks after the first; my fourth story takes place 35 years before that; the fifth takes place 5 years after that; and the sixth takes place, I want to say, just 2 years before the first.

Think of it a bit like Pulp Fiction. One movie, several different stories shown out of chronological order, but they all still fit to make up one complete package.

Frankly, I'm not in favor of non-chronological story-telling, especially in a novel. Like a flashback, it confuses the reader. Even if you specifically state the change in time and place on the page itself, the reader would still be wondering why he's reading something out of order. He might trust the author to have a reason for doing so, but that trust needs to be rewarded with a satisfying revelation or twist.

I remember watching some Japanese horror movie (Ju-On, or something) which was filmed out of chronological order, and largely done for the sake of artistic vanity flair. I wasn't impressed. At all.

I don't know; maybe you can make it work.

BTW, I added some extra comments on my last post in response to your own edited post.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I have six short stories. I want to publish each one individually, then combine them into one collection. That'd be the "novel," so to speak.

Publishing houses consider that an anthology, not a novel--we've been through this before.

Do all your stories have the same protagonist? If so, try to either pick one story that has the most potential for expansion and maybe work the other stories into it in some way. I'd be willing to read your stories and maybe give you some suggestions, but I've got a couple of 3d modeling commissions to complete, so I can't spare the time.

Anyways, if they're different protagonists, then, again, pick one with the the most potential for development.

On second thought, you might be able to weave all six stories into a novel after all, but they must be set in the same timeline and continuity, and all the stories must have one focused theme and premise. Mark Stiegler's Earthweb tells a single story from the POV's of at least 6 main characters, each with their own character arc and development within the same story. You should try to get your hands on his book and use that as an example.

They're about different protagonists, the timeline is the same, the continuity is the same, and the each one of the character's stories connects with one another. Combined, they take place over about a 35 year span, though. They all have different themes for the most part, but they're still relevant to one another. There are two specific characters who are prevalent through all six stories, and you learn more about them as the stories progress. They're the ones who tie it all together.

Doesn't seem to be any problems in rewriting this into a novel. The 35 year span isn't a issue at all, as long as you know how to do some narrative condensing and flashbacks when necessary. Flashbacks should be used VERY sparingly, though. They detract from the current flow of the story, and makes the reader wonder why he's reading about something that happened ages ago.

The difference in themes can be remedied if you relegate certain characters as side characters, and don't focus on them too much. Maybe turn them into sidekicks or allies of the main character(s) and keep them in the periphery--essential to plot progression, but otherwise "ignored".

No, no flashbacks or anything. The easiest way for me to explain it is like this; my second story takes place a year before the first; my third story takes place 2 weeks after the first; my fourth story takes place 35 years before that; the fifth takes place 5 years after that; and the sixth takes place, I want to say, just 2 years before the first.

Think of it a bit like Pulp Fiction. One movie, several different stories shown out of chronological order, but they all still fit to make up one complete package.

Frankly, I'm not in favor of non-chronological story-telling, especially in a novel. Like a flashback, it confuses the reader. Even if you specifically state the change in time and place on the page itself, the reader would still be wondering why he's reading something out of order. He might trust the author to have a reason for doing so, but that trust needs to be rewarded with a satisfying revelation or twist.

I remember watching some Japanese horror movie (Ju-On, or something) which was filmed out of chronological order, and largely done for the sake of artistic vanity flair. I wasn't impressed. At all.

I don't know; maybe you can make it work.

BTW, I added some extra comments on my last post in response to your own edited post.

It's more of a case of me not wanting the reader to know everything right off the bat. If I did it chronologically, the biggest event of the story would happen within the first hundred pages or so. As I've said, these characters become more developed as the stories go.

For example, the character I was talking about, in the first story, he's only a cameo. The second story is kind of the same, but you realize he must know more than you initially thought. The third story, you find out a few important things about him towards the end. The fourth, he's a full fledged side character. The fifth, he's the main protagonist. Then, in the sixth, while a smaller scale story, and he's not the protagonist anymore, things start to go even deeper into his mental state, from the point of view of someone extremely "close" to him. Which could conflict with the noble and just character he's portrayed as in all the previous stories.

Also, if I put them chronologically, some plot points that get brought up in certain stories probably wouldn't be explained for another 3 or 4 stories after, and they'd pretty much cease to be relevant by that point. That's more due to the way I write my dialogue, though. I don't write dialogue as if it's exposition. I write it as if it's literally people talking to each other. They all know what's going on, so they don't explain anything.

However, if something is mentioned in a conversation that I know the reader won't get, it's bound to show up again as a plot point. Even if it's not in the same story.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I have six short stories. I want to publish each one individually, then combine them into one collection. That'd be the "novel," so to speak.

Publishing houses consider that an anthology, not a novel--we've been through this before.

Do all your stories have the same protagonist? If so, try to either pick one story that has the most potential for expansion and maybe work the other stories into it in some way. I'd be willing to read your stories and maybe give you some suggestions, but I've got a couple of 3d modeling commissions to complete, so I can't spare the time.

Anyways, if they're different protagonists, then, again, pick one with the the most potential for development.

On second thought, you might be able to weave all six stories into a novel after all, but they must be set in the same timeline and continuity, and all the stories must have one focused theme and premise. Mark Stiegler's Earthweb tells a single story from the POV's of at least 6 main characters, each with their own character arc and development within the same story. You should try to get your hands on his book and use that as an example.

They're about different protagonists, the timeline is the same, the continuity is the same, and the each one of the character's stories connects with one another. Combined, they take place over about a 35 year span, though. They all have different themes for the most part, but they're still relevant to one another. There are two specific characters who are prevalent through all six stories, and you learn more about them as the stories progress. They're the ones who tie it all together.

Doesn't seem to be any problems in rewriting this into a novel. The 35 year span isn't a issue at all, as long as you know how to do some narrative condensing and flashbacks when necessary. Flashbacks should be used VERY sparingly, though. They detract from the current flow of the story, and makes the reader wonder why he's reading about something that happened ages ago.

The difference in themes can be remedied if you relegate certain characters as side characters, and don't focus on them too much. Maybe turn them into sidekicks or allies of the main character(s) and keep them in the periphery--essential to plot progression, but otherwise "ignored".

No, no flashbacks or anything. The easiest way for me to explain it is like this; my second story takes place a year before the first; my third story takes place 2 weeks after the first; my fourth story takes place 35 years before that; the fifth takes place 5 years after that; and the sixth takes place, I want to say, just 2 years before the first.

Think of it a bit like Pulp Fiction. One movie, several different stories shown out of chronological order, but they all still fit to make up one complete package.

Frankly, I'm not in favor of non-chronological story-telling, especially in a novel. Like a flashback, it confuses the reader. Even if you specifically state the change in time and place on the page itself, the reader would still be wondering why he's reading something out of order. He might trust the author to have a reason for doing so, but that trust needs to be rewarded with a satisfying revelation or twist.

I remember watching some Japanese horror movie (Ju-On, or something) which was filmed out of chronological order, and largely done for the sake of artistic vanity flair. I wasn't impressed. At all.

I don't know; maybe you can make it work.

BTW, I added some extra comments on my last post in response to your own edited post.

Yeah I think that thing is that what does the fact these stories are in a nonlinear format add to the overarching story. In Pulp Fiction it added a weird surreal quality to the story reflecting multiple themes of the film, the bizarre nature of the situations, how seemingly insignificant decisions effect almost everything, and how weird and **** up things can get. Another is Jules's religious nature; just as an example; The line "What happened here is a miracle, I just want you to **** acknowledge it!" wouldn't resonate the same way for the audience's view of the character if the story was presented chronologically. Oh and we also wouldn't know the significance of bad things happening whenever Vincent's on the toilet if the story was told chronologically.

Can't really comment on your way of combining the stories since I'd have to read everything (and I'm simply too busy right now), so I'll just talk about the dialogue part:

SlyTF1 wrote:Also, if I put them chronologically, some plot points that get brought up in certain stories probably wouldn't be explained for another 3 or 4 stories after, and they'd pretty much cease to be relevant by that point. That's more due to the way I write my dialogue, though. I don't write dialogue as if it's exposition. I write it as if it's literally people talking to each other. They all know what's going on, so they don't explain anything.

Well, that's good dialogue technique, as in not info-dumping through dialogue, but in the larger scheme of things, it's not what I'd call "efficient" story telling. What I mean is, information can be conveyed in a number of ways, including dialogue, internal monologue and descriptions of characters' expressions and actions. Sometimes less is more, but too little info is not a good thing either.

Another thing; ALWAYS start your novel with the protagonist. He/she should always be the first character your reader gets to know, as it is through his/her eyes that the reader experiences the story. An rare exception to that rule is if the protagonist is meant to be enigmatic, and you want the reader to slowly peel away the mystery by seeing him through the eyes of those around him.

Orson Scott Card's Ender's Shadow starts off with the side character Poke, and it is through her eyes that you first meet Bean, the actual protagonist. This is done to effectively paint a picture of who the character is, and Poke's impression of Bean fleshes out the character more efficiently than to start from Bean's own perspective. Go to hatrack.com and search out his article on the making of the novel. It should help you make a good decision on how or whether to start with the protagonist or a side character.

SW's SilverHammer wrote:Yeah I think that thing is that what does the fact these stories are in a nonlinear format add to the overarching story. In Pulp Fiction it added a weird surreal quality to the story reflecting multiple themes of the film, the bizarre nature of the situations, how seemingly insignificant decisions effect almost everything, and how weird and **** up things can get. Another is Jules's religious nature; just as an example; The line "What happened here is a miracle, I just want you to **** acknowledge it!" wouldn't resonate the same way for the audience's view of the character if the story was presented chronologically. Oh and we also wouldn't know the significance of bad things happening whenever Vincent's on the toilet if the story was told chronologically.

Exactly! If the reader is to trust the author to know what he's doing, then the payoff has to be satisfying and make sense in the end, and not just artistic conceit.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Can't really comment on your way of combining the stories since I'd have to read everything (and I'm simply too busy right now), so I'll just talk about the dialogue part:

SlyTF1 wrote:Also, if I put them chronologically, some plot points that get brought up in certain stories probably wouldn't be explained for another 3 or 4 stories after, and they'd pretty much cease to be relevant by that point. That's more due to the way I write my dialogue, though. I don't write dialogue as if it's exposition. I write it as if it's literally people talking to each other. They all know what's going on, so they don't explain anything.

Well, that's good dialogue technique, as in not info-dumping through dialogue, but in the larger scheme of things, it's not what I'd call "efficient" story telling. What I mean is, information can be conveyed in a number of ways, including dialogue, internal monologue and descriptions of characters' expressions and actions. Sometimes more is less, but too little info is not a good thing either.

Another thing; ALWAYS start your novel with the protagonist. He/she should always be the first character your reader gets to know, as it is through his/her eyes that the reader experiences the story. An rare exception to that rule is if the protagonist is meant to be enigmatic, and you want the reader to slowly peel away the mystery by seeing him through the eyes of those around him.

Orson Scott Card's Ender's Shadow starts off with the side character Poke, and it is through her eyes that you first meet Bean, the actual protagonist. This is done to effectively paint a picture of who the character is, and Poke's impression of Bean fleshes out the character more efficiently than to start from Bean's own perspective. Go to hatrack.com and search out his article on the making of the novel. It should help you make a good decision on how or whether to start with the protagonist or a side character.

I feel like I should also point out that, while the characters are a major focus, it's more of the universe that the stories take place in which matter more to me. Plus, I wouldn't say there's one main character at all. If there is one main character, it's the entire galaxy. An entire galaxy that effects a team of people in different ways.

Each story has its own main character, but when the stories are put together, the one real constant character is the world these stories take place in. That and the lore.

SlyTF1 wrote:I feel like I should also point out that, while the characters are a major focus, it's more of the universe that the stories take place in which matter more to me. Plus, I wouldn't say there's one main character at all. If there is one main character, it's the entire galaxy. An entire galaxy that effects a team of people in different ways.

Each story has its own main character, but when the stories are put together, the one real constant character is the world these stories take place in. That and the lore.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I've written stories like that before, where the setting itself becomes as interesting, if not more so, than the characters themselves.

Frankly, I'm not into "experimental" writing (I stick to chronological timelines and keep to a single protagonist at a time), so I can't really say one way or the other. If you feel your story has to be told that way, I say go for it.

BTW, are these stories of yours "mainstream" fiction, horror, detective fiction, science fiction or fantasy? It's hard to give proper advice and suggestions without knowing the genre, as each different genre is it's own thing. For example, romance stories require happy endings, no exceptions. Some publishers state that outright.

And with speculative fiction (usually a blend of different genres, or one that doesn't really fit into any particular category), there's a tipping point where there might be too much or not enough genre elements, which changes your target audience entirely. Take the late David Gemmell, for instance. His first book, titled Legend, initially had very little in the way of magic and sorcery, and felt more like a fictitious historical novel than fantasy. At the orders of his editor, he had to go back and add more fantasy elements into the story before it even qualifies as a fantasy novel.

EDIT: I just had an idea. Why not turn your collection of short stories into an epistolary novel? Just a collection of journals, writings, blog entries, and/or recordings that your characters leave. I think this should work really well for the kind of story you're telling.

Besides, Va'al said your story was very dialogue-heavy, which works well in this case, since journal writing is basically a person talking to himself in written form.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I feel like I should also point out that, while the characters are a major focus, it's more of the universe that the stories take place in which matter more to me. Plus, I wouldn't say there's one main character at all. If there is one main character, it's the entire galaxy. An entire galaxy that effects a team of people in different ways.

Each story has its own main character, but when the stories are put together, the one real constant character is the world these stories take place in. That and the lore.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I've written stories like that before, where the setting itself becomes as interesting, if not more so, than the characters themselves.

Frankly, I'm not into "experimental" writing (I stick to chronological timelines and keep to a single protagonist at a time), so I can't really say one way or the other. If you feel your story has to be told that way, I say go for it.

BTW, are these stories of yours "mainstream" fiction, horror, detective fiction, science fiction or fantasy? It's hard to give proper advice and suggestions without knowing the genre, as each different genre is it's own thing. For example, romance stories require happy endings, no exceptions. Some publishers state that outright.

And with speculative fiction (usually a blend of different genres, or one that doesn't really fit into any particular category), there's a tipping point where there might be too much or not enough genre elements, which changes your target audience entirely. Take the late David Gemmell, for instance. His first book, titled Legend, initially had very little in the way of magic and sorcery, and felt more like a fictitious historical novel than fantasy. At the orders of his editor, he had to go back and add more fantasy elements into the story before it even qualifies as a fantasy novel.

It's sci-fi fantasy. All the characters are aliens and each story takes place on a different planet or... somewhere in space. I want to say it's like Star Wars or Mass Effect, but what I'm doing with it probably much more realistic and darker in tone than any of those. The first few stories aren't all that dark, but I've got some pretty deep things planned for this series. I know this is like the most cliche to compare something like this to, but I think a more accurate comparison would be Game of Thrones in space. I don't even know if I'd go that far, but that's all I can think of to compare it to.

It's not "dark," like how dudebros and every casual movie watcher thinks dark is supposed to be. No. It's dark on a psychological level. It's not overly dark, but realistically dark. I don't go out of my way to kill off main characters or anything. But to put it into perspective, none of the main characters are exactly "well."

But the lore literally has billions of years of history behind the universe and I have all of that mapped out too.

SlyTF1 wrote:It's sci-fi fantasy. All the characters are aliens and each story takes place on a different planet or... somewhere in space. I want to say it's like Star Wars or Mass Effect, but what I'm doing with it probably much more realistic and darker in tone than any of those. The first few stories aren't all that dark, but I've got some pretty deep things planned for this series. I know this is like the most cliche to compare something like this to, but I think a more accurate comparison would be Game of Thrones in space. I don't even know if I'd go that far, but that's all I can think of to compare it to.

It's not "dark," like how dudebros and every casual movie watcher thinks dark is supposed to be. No. It's dark on a psychological level. It's not overly dark, but realistically dark. I don't go out of my way to kill off main characters or anything. But to put it into perspective, none of the main characters are exactly "well."

But the lore literally has billions of years of history behind the universe and I have all of that mapped out too.

Okay, at least I'm getting a clearer picture now.

Game of Thrones in space sounds interesting, and that, my friend, is your hook. GoT is all the rage these days, and your query should emphasize this as much as possible. Sure it's cliched, but it grabs a person's attention.

And dark is good. Dark sells. Just like sex. No, seriously, it does sell.

I obviously haven't read your stories, but I think you may have gotten your genres mixed up. Star Wars (post midichlorians) and Mass Effect have no fantasy elements in them. They belong more to the unflatteringly coined "space opera" genre. Unless it actually has sorcery and supernatural elements in it, the term fantasy doesn't apply. And this is very important; if you mix up your genres, you won't know who to market your book to.

A good example of scifi and fantasy would be Highlander - The Search for Vengeance. It takes place in post-apocalyptic New York in the future, but has fantasy elements in it (immortals, the Quickening and all that).

Frankly, the genre you're writing for is very hard to pinpoint and categorize, despite it appearing frequently in anime (Neon Genesis Evangelion is a perfect example). It doesn't really have a proper genre, but I call it futuristic fantasy for reference's sake. TBH, I'm in the same boat here, except I'm fortunate enough to have set my whole story in one single city in the future, which neatly puts it in the urban fantasy genre.

ADDED FROM AN EARLIER EDIT: I just had an idea. Why not turn your collection of short stories into an epistolary novel? Just a collection of journals, writings, blog entries, and/or recordings that your characters leave. I think this should work really well for the kind of story you're telling.

Besides, Va'al said your story was very dialogue-heavy, which works well in this case, since journal writing is basically a person talking to himself in written form.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:It's sci-fi fantasy. All the characters are aliens and each story takes place on a different planet or... somewhere in space. I want to say it's like Star Wars or Mass Effect, but what I'm doing with it probably much more realistic and darker in tone than any of those. The first few stories aren't all that dark, but I've got some pretty deep things planned for this series. I know this is like the most cliche to compare something like this to, but I think a more accurate comparison would be Game of Thrones in space. I don't even know if I'd go that far, but that's all I can think of to compare it to.

It's not "dark," like how dudebros and every casual movie watcher thinks dark is supposed to be. No. It's dark on a psychological level. It's not overly dark, but realistically dark. I don't go out of my way to kill off main characters or anything. But to put it into perspective, none of the main characters are exactly "well."

But the lore literally has billions of years of history behind the universe and I have all of that mapped out too.

Okay, at least I'm getting a clearer picture now.

Game of Thrones in space sounds interesting, and that, my friend, is your hook. GoT is all the rage these days, and your query should emphasize this as much as possible. Sure it's cliched, but it grabs a person's attention.

And dark is good. Dark sells. Just like sex. No, seriously, it does sell.

I obviously haven't read your stories, but I think you may have gotten your genres mixed up. Star Wars (post midichlorians) and Mass Effect have no fantasy elements in them. They belong more to the unflatteringly coined "space opera" genre. Unless it actually has sorcery and supernatural elements in it, the term fantasy doesn't apply. And this is very important; if you mix up your genres, you won't know who to market your book to.

A good example of scifi and fantasy would be Highlander - The Search for Vengeance. It takes place in post-apocalyptic New York in the future, but has fantasy elements in it (immortals, the Quickening and all that).

Frankly, the genre you're writing for is very hard to pinpoint and categorize, despite it appearing frequently in anime (Neon Genesis Evangelion is a perfect example). It doesn't really have a proper genre, but I call it futuristic fantasy for reference's sake. TBH, I'm in the same boat here, except I'm fortunate enough to have set my whole story in one single city in the future, which neatly puts it in the urban fantasy genre.

ADDED FROM AN EARLIER EDIT: I just had an idea. Why not turn your collection of short stories into an epistolary novel? Just a collection of journals, writings, blog entries, and/or recordings that your characters leave. I think this should work really well for the kind of story you're telling.

Besides, Va'al said your story was very dialogue-heavy, which works well in this case, since journal writing is basically a person talking to himself in written form.

I have a real problem with cliche, though. I just don't like bringing myself to do what everyone else does. Oh well. I guess that's just the name of the game, then.

There's no magic or anything, but there are supernatural elements. The entire galaxy is founded on a supernatural element. Literally, the entire galaxy. The politics, the people, the planets themselves. I'd be lying if I didn't say there's a major underlying supernatural aspect to it all. From what I've written so far, though, the second story is the only one that really touches on it. Everything else is pretty... mortal-ish.

I don't really want to bring any heavy supernatural things into these stories for years, and I mean years down the line. It's what I'm looking forward to the most, but at its early stages, I just want to focus on the characters and the universe. Lore about it all will be mentioned, but not really delved into for a while. At least, those are my plans.

And I don't think the stories would work as journals. There are other characters who have just as much importance as the protagonists in each story. And I'm trying to be immersive with the stories, to actually take the reader on a "ride," so to speak. At least with my later stories. And I don't think a journal would do that. I want the reader to be in the thick with these characters. Especially since a lot of it revolves around war.

Perhaps removing a lot of the clichés already present in the text would help addressing the first point, then.


If you think this fits in a Game of Thrones/Rome/Tudors type of setting or landscape, perhaps not journals, but stories told from the different characters' perspectives might work? You would literally be allowing the reader to see what each character is thinking, how they behave, why they behave that way.

My tip, at this point, on top of all the comments (which I'm annoyed did not show in the document I sent..) is the following: read. Read everything you can in the genres you think you might be touching on. Read prose, short and long, read comics, read poetry if you have to. Get a feel for what the language is doing with the themes already there. Read Ann Leckie, read Tim O'Brien, read Joseph Conrad, Wilfred Owen, Brian K. Vaughan, Sylvia Plath, Dan Simmons, Virginia Woolf, Kurt Vonnegut - if you want to avoid what other people are saying about war, about sci-fi, about speculative fiction, about all of those, find out what they're saying first.

Va'al wrote:Perhaps removing a lot of the clichés already present in the text would help addressing the first point, then.


If you think this fits in a Game of Thrones/Rome/Tudors type of setting or landscape, perhaps not journals, but stories told from the different characters' perspectives might work? You would literally be allowing the reader to see what each character is thinking, how they behave, why they behave that way.

My tip, at this point, on top of all the comments (which I'm annoyed did not show in the document I sent..) is the following: read. Read everything you can in the genres you think you might be touching on. Read prose, short and long, read comics, read poetry if you have to. Get a feel for what the language is doing with the themes already there. Read Ann Leckie, read Tim O'Brien, read Joseph Conrad, Wilfred Owen, Brian K. Vaughan, Sylvia Plath, Dan Simmons, Virginia Woolf, Kurt Vonnegut - if you want to avoid what other people are saying about war, about sci-fi, about speculative fiction, about all of those, find out what they're saying first.

I do that perspective thing in my other stories. There's none of that in the first one, because honestly, I didn't think any of the other characters were interesting enough to warrant it. I used the first story, essentially as a springboard for the rest of them.

The second one, though, there's one character who's just as important, if not more, than the protagonist himself. I even have a spinoff "series," planned for this one character. So, I usually do have more than one perspective.

SlyTF1 wrote:I have a real problem with cliche, though. I just don't like bringing myself to do what everyone else does. Oh well. I guess that's just the name of the game, then.

Well, if it makes you feel better, there's no such thing as an original story any more. Just refreshing versions of a basic tale. You know, the infamous "Pretty Woman as a modern retelling of the classic Cinderella story" thing.

SlyTF1 wrote:I don't really want to bring any heavy supernatural things into these stories for years, and I mean years down the line. It's what I'm looking forward to the most, but at its early stages, I just want to focus on the characters and the universe. Lore about it all will be mentioned, but not really delved into for a while. At least, those are my plans.

Well, I advise at least foreshadowing the supernatural elements in the beginning of the first story. It's important that you set the atmosphere and give a very clear feel of the genre you're writing in, so that the reader knows what to expect. I ran into a similar problem with my own novel, and my solution was to add a prologue in the form of a journal entry by a character who is only mentioned once or twice in the novel's entirety. His journal entry tells the reader, "Make no mistake, this is an occult fantasy story, but set in the future."

Even in the Game of Thrones, they had to show the Whitewalkers in the very beginning. Otherwise, the names and non-supernatural elements in the next few episodes will confuse the reader/viewer. Seriously, when I first stumbled onto an episode of GoT and saw a King Robert there, I thought I was watch a historical series about England.

SlyTF1 wrote:And I don't think the stories would work as journals. There are other characters who have just as much importance as the protagonists in each story. And I'm trying to be immersive with the stories, to actually take the reader on a "ride," so to speak. At least with my later stories. And I don't think a journal would do that. I want the reader to be in the thick with these characters. Especially since a lot of it revolves around war.

If properly handled, epistoral novels can be riveting in the way the writer plunges you into the mind of the characters. But it's not easy to do, and might be more trouble than it's worth, on second thought.

SlyTF1 wrote:

Va'al wrote:Perhaps removing a lot of the clichés already present in the text would help addressing the first point, then.


If you think this fits in a Game of Thrones/Rome/Tudors type of setting or landscape, perhaps not journals, but stories told from the different characters' perspectives might work? You would literally be allowing the reader to see what each character is thinking, how they behave, why they behave that way.

My tip, at this point, on top of all the comments (which I'm annoyed did not show in the document I sent..) is the following: read. Read everything you can in the genres you think you might be touching on. Read prose, short and long, read comics, read poetry if you have to. Get a feel for what the language is doing with the themes already there. Read Ann Leckie, read Tim O'Brien, read Joseph Conrad, Wilfred Owen, Brian K. Vaughan, Sylvia Plath, Dan Simmons, Virginia Woolf, Kurt Vonnegut - if you want to avoid what other people are saying about war, about sci-fi, about speculative fiction, about all of those, find out what they're saying first.

I do that perspective thing in my other stories. There's none of that in the first one, because honestly, I didn't think any of the other characters were interesting enough to warrant it. I used the first story, essentially as a springboard for the rest of them.

The second one, though, there's one character who's just as important, if not more, than the protagonist himself. I even have a spinoff "series," planned for this one character. So, I usually do have more than one perspective.

Perhaps, but the first story is not, in its current state, a good lead into anything else. As I've told you already, none of the characters are a draw. Positive or negative. If the first story of a collection, if the first chapter of a book, if the first issue of a series, if the first episode of a show don't work, people are not going to be that bothered to continue.

And if it's a collection of stories connected by a shared universe, your entry point needs to be much stronger.

Va'al wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

Va'al wrote:Perhaps removing a lot of the clichés already present in the text would help addressing the first point, then.


If you think this fits in a Game of Thrones/Rome/Tudors type of setting or landscape, perhaps not journals, but stories told from the different characters' perspectives might work? You would literally be allowing the reader to see what each character is thinking, how they behave, why they behave that way.

My tip, at this point, on top of all the comments (which I'm annoyed did not show in the document I sent..) is the following: read. Read everything you can in the genres you think you might be touching on. Read prose, short and long, read comics, read poetry if you have to. Get a feel for what the language is doing with the themes already there. Read Ann Leckie, read Tim O'Brien, read Joseph Conrad, Wilfred Owen, Brian K. Vaughan, Sylvia Plath, Dan Simmons, Virginia Woolf, Kurt Vonnegut - if you want to avoid what other people are saying about war, about sci-fi, about speculative fiction, about all of those, find out what they're saying first.

I do that perspective thing in my other stories. There's none of that in the first one, because honestly, I didn't think any of the other characters were interesting enough to warrant it. I used the first story, essentially as a springboard for the rest of them.

The second one, though, there's one character who's just as important, if not more, than the protagonist himself. I even have a spinoff "series," planned for this one character. So, I usually do have more than one perspective.

Perhaps, but the first story is not, in its current state, a good lead into anything else. As I've told you already, none of the characters are a draw. Positive or negative. If the first story of a collection, if the first chapter of a book, if the first issue of a series, if the first episode of a show don't work, people are not going to be that bothered to continue.

And if it's a collection of stories connected by a shared universe, your entry point needs to be much stronger.

Exactly. Most readers (editors/agents in particular) don't read beyond the first line, if it doesn't catch their attention. The most they'll give you is a couple of paragraphs before they move on to the next book on the shelf or slush pile.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Just a quick question, Me Grimlock. Do excerpts (as in the first 3-4 chapters of a novel) count as a first publication? It's not uncommon for authors to offer excerpts as a "free sample" to potential readers on their site or blog.

I don't know if there's any easy answer to this. Depends on the length of the work, depends on the publishing house considering it. If it's a novel, like you say, I don't think three or four chapters would hurt. But it's not so cut and dry.

It's more based on the percentage of the overall thing rather than a concrete number of chapters. For instance, it's not a good idea to post the first three to four chapters of a work that's six chapters, but okay if it's sixty. It's also not good to post the first three to four chapters of a book if those chapters are long, regardless of how many short chapters follow. But if they're short and the last few chapters are long, then it might be okay. I wouldn't say there's a good number when talking about chapters or pages, but rather percentage. Maybe 10-20%? A good rule is just enough and not a word more.

SlyTF1 wrote:I just started looking at Createspace. Do they have anything for advertising, or is it just self publishing?

Not sure. They have a service they call Kirkus Indie Review, which buys you a book review from a well-known voice in the industry, but I didn't buy that, so I can't tell you how effective it is. They also have Marketing Copy Essentials, which isn't a marketing service per se, but it helps you to "brand" your story, gives you the back cover blurb and some other stuff. Essentially, they get someone who knows how to entice a reader to write some blurbs for you. It's up to you how you use those blurbs. I bought that service.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Flashbacks should be used VERY sparingly, though. They detract from the current flow of the story, and makes the reader wonder why he's reading about something that happened ages ago.

I can't argue with using them sparingly, but when used right, they don't detract from the story. Otherwise, flashbacks would never be used. Two examples I can think of where flashbacks were necessary and gave to the story are Stephen King's Dream Catcher (skip the movie, read the book) and Futurama's "Luck of the Fryish." If you haven't yet, check those out. How they enhance the story is better left to experiencing them rather than me telling you about them. There's nothing I can say that would do them justice without having to go on for pages and pages.

But, in a nutshell, the thing about flashbacks is the reader already knows the outcome of what's happening for the most part. It's in the past. So the reader doesn't really feel excited since there's no suspense. If you don't hook them in another way, they're bored or, even worse, skip the flashback. Does this character live? Yeah, we've seen him in other chapters. Does that character get the girl? Yeah, they're married in chapter four. So, in flashbacks, you have to keep the reader's suspense by making them ask different questions: not "what" but "who" or "why" or "how."

A "what" question is "what will happen to this character." We already know. The question you're trying to give the reader shouldn't be about what will happen to him, but maybe how. The character died, but the suspense of the flashback is how. Or maybe why. Or maybe who killed him.

What question: Did he get the girl? Pfft. We know he didn't. No good.
How question: How did he mess things up? Better.

What question: Did he die? Yeah he did. You already told us in chapter six.
Who question: Who was that mystery shadow guy who stabbed him? And why?

Engage the reader with a different question. But if you think of the story as complete without the flashback, get rid of it, same as you would any chapter you find unnecessary.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Another thing; ALWAYS start your novel with the protagonist. He/she should always be the first character your reader gets to know, as it is through his/her eyes that the reader experiences the story. An rare exception to that rule is if the protagonist is meant to be enigmatic, and you want the reader to slowly peel away the mystery by seeing him through the eyes of those around him.

Don't know if I agree with this. Sometimes it's better to hook in with the antagonist, or a secondary character. Sometimes it's better to build a reader's hopes of the hero based on what others say about him or her. I can think of a few examples where the main protagonist doesn't show up right away, most of them movies though. Brave New World, The Odyssey, Atlas Shrugged, Star Wars, The Matrix, Ghostbusters. How many stories have you seen a chapter with a couple of little guys getting in trouble way over their heads and calling in "a specialist" who then appears in chapter two?

The rule is to not to start with the protagonist first, but to start with the conflict as early as possible. Get the reader hooked. And even then, this rule can be broken with something called "bridging conflict," which is the excitement you use to get the reader from the start of the story to the start of the main conflict.

SKYWARPED_128 wrote:Yeah, I know what you mean. I've written stories like that before, where the setting itself becomes as interesting, if not more so, than the characters themselves.

Setting should be treated as a character. Give it characteristics, tendencies, quirks.

SlyTF1 wrote:It's sci-fi fantasy.

I'm about eleven pages deep into your story, and it seems to be straight up sci-fi. I heard a definition that made sense: science fiction is something that can possibly happen even if it's unlikely, fantasy is something that could never happen. This might be outdated, since I heard it a loooong time ago, and it's very black and white. A sci-fi fantasy would be science fantasy, which is a little-known middleground where something looks like science fiction with all the gadgets and space stuff, but it could never happen. That would be where stuff like Star Wars lives.

But then, I think in a case like this, it's better to go with your gut. Does it have gadgets and is it set in the future? Then it's sci-fi, regardless of the Force or any other mystical thing. Does it have magic in it with swashbuckling elves and dragons? Then it's fantasy, regardless of how many lasers you put in. I think in a case like this, it's better to just use broad strokes when applying terms because readers expect certain things when you call something a sci-fi or a fantasy. So I'd classify your story as sci-fi and leave the fantasy descriptor out unless you're planning to show the story in a world of dragons and ogres.

Ironhidensh wrote:Well, I've found the legitimate responses in this thread to be very informative. Writing a novel is one of the few childhood dreams I still cling too. The others I gave up on in favor of the practical reality life presented me with. It's really not bitter out, it's just what it is. Trust me, I have no delusions of grandeur about ever getting published. I want to write it just write it. Well, more like finish it. I've been working on it for many a year.

Hey, I encourage you to stick with it. If you have the writing itch, it's one of the most fulfilling itches to scratch. There's nothing like finishing the first draft of something and, also, nothing like finishing the final draft.

Blast Cannon wrote:What film would you recommend I go and see this Friday?

Avengers: Age of Ultron was decent. :p

Me, Grimlock! wrote:I don't know if there's any easy answer to this. Depends on the length of the work, depends on the publishing house considering it. If it's a novel, like you say, I don't think three or four chapters would hurt. But it's not so cut and dry.

It's more based on the percentage of the overall thing rather than a concrete number of chapters. For instance, it's not a good idea to post the first three to four chapters of a work that's six chapters, but okay if it's sixty. It's also not good to post the first three to four chapters of a book if those chapters are long, regardless of how many short chapters follow. But if they're short and the last few chapters are long, then it might be okay. I wouldn't say there's a good number when talking about chapters or pages, but rather percentage. Maybe 10-20%? A good rule is just enough and not a word more.

Many thanks for the explanation! I guess it's best to err on the side of caution. The novel I'm currently writing is a rather "standard" 300+ page one with 20-24 page chapters each, so I guess posting 2 chapters as excerpts should be okay in my case.

Me, Grimlock! wrote:I can't argue with using them sparingly, but when used right, they don't detract from the story. Otherwise, flashbacks would never be used. Two examples I can think of where flashbacks were necessary and gave to the story are Stephen King's Dream Catcher (skip the movie, read the book) and Futurama's "Luck of the Fryish." If you haven't yet, check those out. How they enhance the story is better left to experiencing them rather than me telling you about them. There's nothing I can say that would do them justice without having to go on for pages and pages.

Thanks for the recommendations! I'll give those a look.

Me, Grimlock! wrote:But, in a nutshell, the thing about flashbacks is the reader already knows the outcome of what's happening for the most part. It's in the past. So the reader doesn't really feel excited since there's no suspense. If you don't hook them in another way, they're bored or, even worse, skip the flashback. Does this character live? Yeah, we've seen him in other chapters. Does that character get the girl? Yeah, they're married in chapter four. So, in flashbacks, you have to keep the reader's suspense by making them ask different questions: not "what" but "who" or "why" or "how."

A "what" question is "what will happen to this character." We already know. The question you're trying to give the reader shouldn't be about what will happen to him, but maybe how. The character died, but the suspense of the flashback is how. Or maybe why. Or maybe who killed him.

What question: Did he get the girl? Pfft. We know he didn't. No good.
How question: How did he mess things up? Better.

What question: Did he die? Yeah he did. You already told us in chapter six.
Who question: Who was that mystery shadow guy who stabbed him? And why?

Engage the reader with a different question. But if you think of the story as complete without the flashback, get rid of it, same as you would any chapter you find unnecessary.

You make a good point! I didn't quite look at it that way before, but it actually makes perfect sense.

TBH, I've been taught to avoid flashbacks if and when I can (it was almost law as far as the guys at Novel Advice were concerned ), but your method of going about it is an interesting take on things. Actually, I do use flashbacks, but only when the story's progressed to the point where the reader seriously needs to know what happened in the past in order to make sense of events in the present. I guess it ties in with your method of asking "how" questions instead of "what".

Me, Grimlock! wrote:Don't know if I agree with this. Sometimes it's better to hook in with the antagonist, or a secondary character. Sometimes it's better to build a reader's hopes of the hero based on what others say about him or her. I can think of a few examples where the main protagonist doesn't show up right away, most of them movies though. Brave New World, The Odyssey, Atlas Shrugged, Star Wars, The Matrix, Ghostbusters. How many stories have you seen a chapter with a couple of little guys getting in trouble way over their heads and calling in "a specialist" who then appears in chapter two?

The rule is to not to start with the protagonist first, but to start with the conflict as early as possible. Get the reader hooked. And even then, this rule can be broken with something called "bridging conflict," which is the excitement you use to get the reader from the start of the story to the start of the main conflict.

Well, as far as movies--absolutely.

But again, as an old habit that's been drilled into me from my Novel Advice days, I've been taught to always start a story from the protagonist's POV except in very extraordinary circumstances. And frankly, most of the books that didn't start with the protagonist have invariably failed to catch my attention. Then again, I'm the kind that enjoys David Gemmell's books, so that should be quite telling of the kind of writing style I adhere to.

I totally agree regarding conflict, though.

In general, I try to play it safe in the way I write my novels, and as much as possible, I try to keep do things "by the book".

Va'al wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:

Va'al wrote:Perhaps removing a lot of the clichés already present in the text would help addressing the first point, then.


If you think this fits in a Game of Thrones/Rome/Tudors type of setting or landscape, perhaps not journals, but stories told from the different characters' perspectives might work? You would literally be allowing the reader to see what each character is thinking, how they behave, why they behave that way.

My tip, at this point, on top of all the comments (which I'm annoyed did not show in the document I sent..) is the following: read. Read everything you can in the genres you think you might be touching on. Read prose, short and long, read comics, read poetry if you have to. Get a feel for what the language is doing with the themes already there. Read Ann Leckie, read Tim O'Brien, read Joseph Conrad, Wilfred Owen, Brian K. Vaughan, Sylvia Plath, Dan Simmons, Virginia Woolf, Kurt Vonnegut - if you want to avoid what other people are saying about war, about sci-fi, about speculative fiction, about all of those, find out what they're saying first.

I do that perspective thing in my other stories. There's none of that in the first one, because honestly, I didn't think any of the other characters were interesting enough to warrant it. I used the first story, essentially as a springboard for the rest of them.

The second one, though, there's one character who's just as important, if not more, than the protagonist himself. I even have a spinoff "series," planned for this one character. So, I usually do have more than one perspective.

Perhaps, but the first story is not, in its current state, a good lead into anything else. As I've told you already, none of the characters are a draw. Positive or negative. If the first story of a collection, if the first chapter of a book, if the first issue of a series, if the first episode of a show don't work, people are not going to be that bothered to continue.

And if it's a collection of stories connected by a shared universe, your entry point needs to be much stronger.

Everyone else who has read it liked the characters, so I figure I must be doing something right.

And that is why you should spread your work to areas and readers outside of your comfort zone. Always.

Find someone who doesn't care for the genre, at all, but like reading. Ask an honest opinion.
If it grabs them, then it's working.

I wrote two books. I gave away free digital copies. I didn't get 8 pages of responses.

Well done.