(no subject)

[ginny_t]

Happy birthday vampy_chan!

---

Despite rumours to the contrary, I have no snow here. I want no snow here. The snow can stay in the outlying areas. Where it's welcome.

---

I had writing angst yesterday. I'd reached the end of what I know, although I know where they have to go, but is there something in between? Well, I'll just continue writing as if there isn't. I'm not much of a worldbuilder, and that worried me, too. Feedback people are asking me questions to which I don't know the answers. And honestly, I don't know if they're necessary to telling the story.

Worldbuilding vs. storytelling is part of why I'm so antipathetic towards series/sequels/-ologies/franchises. In this entry, theferrett explains what I don't like about franchises. Explains it possibly better than I could have. It probably has to do with my extreme lack of patience. I want to know how things work out. And often, I could care less about saving the world. I want to know if the friendship will be mended, which suitor the girl is going to choose, if the tormented villain really has no redeeming characteristics. Typical - I fell into a rant again.

---

Health update: Seems like I was just cold & dehydrated yesterday. Today I feel fine - yay!

Comments

[epi-lj.livejournal.com]

While I agree heartily with most of what is being said, I think that "novel" needs to be reinterpreted here. For example, I wouldn't call Tad Williams' tri-or-more-logies "Franchises," even though they span several books. They're essentially really, really long novels.

As another example, I think that Star Trek is usually a franchise whereas, say, Babylon 5 was a novel. They both spanned a gazillion episodes, but one had a defined arc that, when it completed, the story was over, whereas the other just sort of meandered and could have ended at any point when they found out it was no longer profitable or worth bothering with. (Note that there's no need to protest, "Oh, but Deep Space Nine!" I only generalized to "Star Trek" because I hated so many of DSN's characters so passionately that I could never bring myself to watch more than one episode a year without drilling holes in my skull, and thus missed all the gooey connectivity it may or may not have had.)

[ginny-t.livejournal.com]

I read Memory, Sorrow & Thorn, and really enjoyed it. I agree that was one long novel, telling a story with a resolution. I didn't finish the Otherland books, but they also appeared to be one veryvery long novel. Those aren't really "franchises", the way that I think of them. The Wheel of Time is a franchise, although it started out as a long novel (I think). Harry Potter is apparently becoming a franchise. I gave up on Jasper Fforde's delightfully absurd Thursday Next novels because they were too franchise-y for my liking.

[epi-lj.livejournal.com]

Oh, also, I think that it's possible to set several novels in the same world / setting, but with unrelated characters and arcs. For example, that's what clawfoot is doing. She's created a fantasy world and most of her stories are set therein. However, there's no real relationship between the stories other than being set in the same world.

[ginny-t.livejournal.com]

I like that much better. That way, all the trouble of worldbuilding isn't lost after the one story is told, but you can do lovely things like make your protagonist happy & leave him/her alone. Or stop the evil plot and catch the villain. Old-fashioned stuff like that.

[vampy-chan.livejournal.com]

*hugemongous huggles* Thank-you!! :D I'll see you on Sunday! Yay!!