I was just reading something and I thought I'd share it here.
Currently I'm obsessed with Steven Erikson's fantasy series which is putting off a lot of people who find it too complicated and is also drawing a lot of people who are tired of the typical models that are prevalent in today's fantasy genre.
I read an interview on him and was surprised to find out that his bold and attractive style came from his RPG experience in which he was a GM.
Think about it, when you're one player among so many players, you cannot control other characters nor can you predict events. You don't know the whole picture with players A & B planning their secret move and players C and D doing something else. You don't know much about the world and you don't know when new players would come, disrupting plans here and there. You don't know (with mutiple characters) how many more characters are going to show up and what mysteries link what mysteries.
Bottom line: the readers don't know a lot of things that are happening, including each character's whole background, motivation, relationship with other characters etc etc. All we know are some of the characters' background and how they act individually.
Applying this extraordinary style to novels, we have something that is entirely unique. well, it's not something easy to pull off, not with the scale that Erikson's handling, but on a smaller scale, it mightwork.
What he has are a great many of characters, switching POVs (that seems like a no no in novels) and a great many threads with questions answered in subsequent books. Some people find the books hard to follow, being unable to make the connections or losing patience. Some people find them truly refreshing as it proves a challenging read. I don't know how to make this point about RPG style clearer. Read his books if you want to find out more.
Quite often, I was told in critiques that they don't understand this and that, this needs more explanation and that needs more information. I admit that my style tends to be confusing (gee, I sometimes confuse myself too), I'm not good enough a writer to handle things like that yet. But reading Erikson has really opened my eyes. hey, you don't HAVE to give out those information. You don't HAVE to explain things loud and clear. The intelligent readers (if you're a good enough writer who can find the balance) can make the connections and they enjoy making their own theories while waiting for the next book.
Currently I'm obsessed with Steven Erikson's fantasy series which is putting off a lot of people who find it too complicated and is also drawing a lot of people who are tired of the typical models that are prevalent in today's fantasy genre.
I read an interview on him and was surprised to find out that his bold and attractive style came from his RPG experience in which he was a GM.
Think about it, when you're one player among so many players, you cannot control other characters nor can you predict events. You don't know the whole picture with players A & B planning their secret move and players C and D doing something else. You don't know much about the world and you don't know when new players would come, disrupting plans here and there. You don't know (with mutiple characters) how many more characters are going to show up and what mysteries link what mysteries.
Bottom line: the readers don't know a lot of things that are happening, including each character's whole background, motivation, relationship with other characters etc etc. All we know are some of the characters' background and how they act individually.
Applying this extraordinary style to novels, we have something that is entirely unique. well, it's not something easy to pull off, not with the scale that Erikson's handling, but on a smaller scale, it mightwork.
What he has are a great many of characters, switching POVs (that seems like a no no in novels) and a great many threads with questions answered in subsequent books. Some people find the books hard to follow, being unable to make the connections or losing patience. Some people find them truly refreshing as it proves a challenging read. I don't know how to make this point about RPG style clearer. Read his books if you want to find out more.
Quite often, I was told in critiques that they don't understand this and that, this needs more explanation and that needs more information. I admit that my style tends to be confusing (gee, I sometimes confuse myself too), I'm not good enough a writer to handle things like that yet. But reading Erikson has really opened my eyes. hey, you don't HAVE to give out those information. You don't HAVE to explain things loud and clear. The intelligent readers (if you're a good enough writer who can find the balance) can make the connections and they enjoy making their own theories while waiting for the next book.
