Novelisation: crappy
POSTED BY: BrainMissing
UPDATED: Monday, October 17, 2005 08:45
VIEWED: 19854
PAGE 3 of 6
Prior to this, the only stuff of KRAD's that I'd read were his Star Trek novels. (He's doing the ST: IKS Gorkon series, and a couple of others as well.)
I'm a bit into the novelization, and so far it's okay. I'm not blown away by it. But then, I already know the story....so it's really more about how that story is communicated.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I always thought that's what a movie novelization was for - to describe what was going on inside the character's heads. Perhaps I've had it wrong all this time too.
Originally posted by BrainMissing:
He has even forgotten (or perhaps never heard) the 1st rule of writing: show, don't tell.
Lines that were laugh-out-loud funny in the movie fall flat when wrapped in his child-like descriptions. He has completely lost the brilliance of Firefly by explaining EVERYTHING that everyone does - how can our favourite man of mystery be mysterious when we know the motivations behind all his actions? Not to mention that I would be sorely disappointed if I truly believed those were the motivations that Joss Whedon meant him to have.
I liked it for the most part. I have a bone to pick on crucifix vs. cross, but that's my Protestant tendencies showing. What I really like is having all the great quotes from the movie at my fingertips. I'll be underlining incessantly my second time through so I can go back and read them and remember hearing my friends, family and fellow browncoats laugh when they were spoken in the theater.
In particular, I recall River noting the gun Jayne was bringing to the heist on Lilac. She, of course, knew the full specs on the weapon, but then noted that Jayne never referred to it by it's specification. "Mostly, he just called it Phoebe."
That wasn't in the movie. There's a couple of scenes in the book between Mal and Inara that I think I've seen stills of in the magazine that aren't in the movie either. KRAD also went to the trouble of describing Inara's martial arts skill - and the operative's admiration of it - which Moreena discusses with some joy in the magazine, that didn't make the final cut either.
Also, Firefly has always been about nine people, not one or two. To me, changing the voices for various scenes reflects KRAD's understanding of that.
I draw...therefore I am. http://www.mnartists.org/Nora_Leverson
Live in Minnesota? Join the Group! Yahoo Group, that is...
http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/MN-Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree that the novelization is flawed, but I can enjoy it as a sort of "Serenity-to-go" while I sit in a waiting room, etc. I don't, however, read it as canon, but rather much the same way as I enjoy fanfic - by taking from it what I like, and putting aside the rest.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't. We. Just.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I disagree with the person who said we shouldn't
correct each others' grammar on this site. Every
writer wants feedback on their work.
With that in mind, and since I'm calmed down a bit,
I thought I'd do Keith DeCandido the courtesy of
providing a proper critique of his work. Since I was
on campus today, I also consulted a creative writing
professor. She is also an established author and I
hold her opinion in the highest respect. (Unfortunately,
I forgot to ask for her permission to use her name on
the web, so she will remain anonymous.)
I decided to begin this critique at chapter 3, page 43,
simply because that's where I really got annoyed. My
professor was also critiquing chapter 3.
Here are some overall problems:
Over-use of the present participle - both of us
picked up on this right away. It's something that
every creative writing instructor I've ever had
has discouraged. As I understand it, the present
participle should be used only when necessary.
Adverbs in speech tags. The professor caught this
right away, and again, it's a basic principle of
creative writing. I've been taught to avoid the
use of adverbs with the word "said" as much as
humanly possible.
Show, don't tell. Often, a statement is made about
a character that could be shown by an action or
thought on their part.
For instance:
"Mal was in no mood for equivocation." page 44.
The reader already knows this by what he says. Or,
what action can he take that shows this? What
thought can he have?
Example 2:next paragraph, the dignity/temper
thing. This could more smoothly be conveyed in
a thought:
*A Captain doesn't fall on his gorram ass!*
(In the real text that would be in italics.)
Example 3:
"Restraining himself from killing Wash..."
How did he restrain himself? Show this through
action:
Mal clenched his jaw, but turned...
OK, enough of that. Next thing:
There are many unnecessary words. They slow down
the story and, therefore, detract from the action.
For example:
"Mal thought to bend his knees and keep from falling
over, which enabled him to keep a portion of his
dignity."
could be shortened to:
Mal bent his knees to keep from falling over.
Example 2:
"Wash said in a tone indicating disappointment"
could be shortened to:
Wash said indignantly
or
Wash's tone was indignant.
Next: You use the word "com unit", and then
(presumably) feel you have to define it. Yet on
the next page you use the word "intercom". If you
use a familiar word, you won't need the
definition, which detracts from the mood of the
story.
Why not be consistent:
Mal clenched his jaw, but turned to the intercom.
"This is the Captain..."
Or use description instead of definition:
Mal clenched his jaw, but turned to the 'com unit.
All over the ship, the crew looked up as his voice
crackled above their heads. "This is the Captain..."
Your diction in general is oddly chosen. My professor
thought that you used the most readily
available word, rather than searching for the
right one. She pointed out the words "aforementioned",
"thus", and the phrase "sad to say", which didn't seem
to fit with the tone of the scene. They're old-
fashioned words, and don't match the crew's mode
of speech.
Overall, she and I both thought that you didn't
really want to write this book. I realise it's
very difficult to work with someone else's story.
But if it's true that you didn't want to do it,
why did you take the contract?
I hope these comments are helpful to you and
further explain the anger in my previous post.
-BrainMissing
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
At the behest of Mr. Riley Billings, who happens to be something of a Firefly Fan (and, on the days he can break free the time, a Browncoat), I would like to point this out: while BrainMissing has a great point about Mr. DeCandido's grammar, it should be noted that one of the great things about fiction, especially some of the great fiction that is just FUN to read, is the purposeful or otherwise included errors, both because of the artistry in those errors, and in the great reminder that the work was written by a fellow human...someone who lives, breathes, eats, shits, and, in general, is quite imperfect.
And that imperfection is what makes any truly Human person or character mighty. Just like Mal's tendecy to run when he should fight, and fight when he should deal makes him the man that he is, our tendecies to do things that are utterly against logic and/or wrong for the situation are what make us each great in our own way. And do not forget that we each see the world through our own perspective in everything, and despite how many common points of perspective we may have with someone, we ALL differ in our points of view somewhere. And that also makes us, as people, great, beautiful, and extremely flawed. But we cope, and the results are often downright entertaining.
Now, from myself, ARP, I would say that while a creative writing professor is easily classified as a subject matter expert, that she teaches IN A LEARNING INSTITUTION...which is another way to say controlled, and sometimes quite unrealistic environments. While I respect her knowledge, as Firefly's experiences with Fox show, what is right, and what the public actually likes are two completely different things most of the time. As sad as the fact is that American audiences have no sense of taste, it is true.
Although I (and Riley) did appreciate the humor of several Browncoats showing off one of the great things about themselves: taste, at least a hint of brains, and some real-world experience. And the discussion, in and of itself, was a good laugh after several weeks of AIT (or, in Riley's case, dealing with his Board of Investors).
And please forgive any of my (various and sundry, I am sure) errors and mispellings in this paper...I was never an English major, and after two plus months of short sleep and classes on my Military Intelligence MOS, not to mention Drill Sergeants completely lacking any understanding of how AIT works or proper grammar and spelling (God Love those Reserve Infantrymen)...well, my brain is quite fried.
And please, do not take these comments as anything other than mine or Riley's opinion on the humor and humaness of this entire thread...not as an insult. As a matter of fact, Riley enjoyed the fact that at least a few highly educated persons are Browncoats. The amusing fact is that he refuses to believe me when I say the majority of Browncoats are like that...God Also LOVE Successful CEO types.
ARP
and, through ARP,
Riley Billings, A rich and very rabid Browncoat
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
At the behest of Mr. Riley Billings, who happens to be something of a Firefly Fan (and, on the days he can break free the time, a Browncoat), I would like to point this out: while BrainMissing has a great point about Mr. DeCandido's grammar, it should be noted that one of the great things about fiction, especially some of the great fiction that is just FUN to read, is the purposeful or otherwise included errors, both because of the artistry in those errors, and in the great reminder that the work was written by a fellow human...someone who lives, breathes, eats, shits, and, in general, is quite imperfect.
And that imperfection is what makes any truly Human person or character mighty. Just like Mal's tendecy to run when he should fight, and fight when he should deal makes him the man that he is, our tendecies to do things that are utterly against logic and/or wrong for the situation are what make us each great in our own way. And do not forget that we each see the world through our own perspective in everything, and despite how many common points of perspective we may have with someone, we ALL differ in our points of view somewhere. And that also makes us, as people, great, beautiful, and extremely flawed. But we cope, and the results are often downright entertaining.
Now, from myself, ARP, I would say that while a creative writing professor is easily classified as a subject matter expert, that she teaches IN A LEARNING INSTITUTION...which is another way to say controlled, and sometimes quite unrealistic environments. While I respect her knowledge, as Firefly's experiences with Fox show, what is right, and what the public actually likes are two completely different things most of the time. As sad as the fact is that American audiences have no sense of taste, it is true.
Although I (and Riley) did appreciate the humor of several Browncoats showing off one of the great things about themselves: taste, at least a hint of brains, and some real-world experience. And the discussion, in and of itself, was a good laugh after several weeks of AIT (or, in Riley's case, dealing with his Board of Investors).
And please forgive any of my (various and sundry, I am sure) errors and mispellings in this paper...I was never an English major, and after two plus months of short sleep and classes on my Military Intelligence MOS, not to mention Drill Sergeants completely lacking any understanding of how AIT works or proper grammar and spelling (God Love those Reserve Infantrymen)...well, my brain is quite fried.
And please, do not take these comments as anything other than mine or Riley's opinion on the humor and humaness of this entire thread...not as an insult. As a matter of fact, Riley enjoyed the fact that at least a few highly educated persons are Browncoats. The amusing fact is that he refuses to believe me when I say the majority of Browncoats are like that...God Also LOVE Successful CEO types.
ARP
and, through ARP,
Riley Billings, A rich and very rabid Browncoat
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Brainmissing, perhaps you haven't been watching the same Firefly universe we all have. The one in which the characters (and, incidentally, the scripts as well) play with language, turning it on its head, making inefficient constructions for the joy of messing with words. Things like "a tone indicating disappointment" are interesting precisely because you don't expect them.
That said, I felt KRAD's diction was more an attempt at being playful than a success; some constructions don't quite fit the characters voices (as in chapter 1, "The Alliance was welcome to the central planets, but keep your grubby mitts off our outer worlds, thank you so much." Just can't hear Mal saying that.)
Still, it was nice to see it written in at least something approximating the style of the show. It had character, even if it didn't have perfection.
My only real complaints are that there WAS a lot of dead space he could have filled but didn't, and that my interpretations of the characters are occasionally VASTLY different from his. (For instance, the more I think about it the more I feel like Mal's been in a bad / self-destructive mood ever since Inara left, making the ship falling apart strongly symbolic of Mal in the very first scene after the prologues. But KRAD starts it out with Mal in a good mood.) Minor, yes, and impossible to understand without seeing the movie, probably, but it still bugs me.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I just found this thread, and Brainmissing, I appreciate you taking the time to make a more detailed critique. FWIW, several of the "rules" your creative writing teacher quote are ones I don't subscribe to. This doesn't mean I'm right and she's wrong -- or the other way around. But I've been a professional writer and a professional editor for 15 years, so I didn't just fall off the turnip truck, either. 
My point is, I didn't make my creative decisions in a vacuum. And I think the notion that you shouldn't use adverbs to modify the word "said" is absurd, FWIW.
In general, most of the fixes you recommend are ones that may be more grammatically sound, but which also drain all the style from the narrative. As several folks have pointed out, I was using the narration to reflect the inner voice of the POV character in the scene in question.
An example. You said:
Quote:
There are many unnecessary words. They slow down
the story and, therefore, detract from the action.
For example:
"Mal thought to bend his knees and keep from falling
over, which enabled him to keep a portion of his
dignity."
could be shortened to:
Mal bent his knees to keep from falling over.
Could be shortened, yes, but you quoted the line without the rest of the paragraph. Here's the whole thing:
"The ship bucked again. Mal thought to bend his knees and keep from falling over, which enabled him to keep a portion of his dignity. Since he was rapidly losing all portions of his temper, this kept things in a kind of balance."
The object there was the parallel construction of Mal's dignity versus Mal's temper. Your fix drains the paragraph of that, rendering it lifeless.
=-=-=-=-=
This is a long thread that I read all of at once, and much of it in a pissy mood because of Brainmissing's original ad hominem attack on me (ameliorated by his later proper critique, so no hard feelings there, BM), so forgive me for not being specific, but...
One poster complained about my over-referencing of past events, and much as I'd love to draw myself up in outrage and defend myself -- I can't. It's one of my biggest failings, and one I'm trying to curb. *sigh* I do tend to overdo the references. Some fans like that, but it's something that should only be done in the service of the plot, and that isn't always the case. Mea culpa on that one.
Another poster complained about what I mentioned earlier -- the narrative reflecting the style of the POV character. I make no apologies for that narrative choice, because the one thing that a novel brings to the table that a movie can't do is get inside the heads of the characters. It's what makes the novelization stand apart from the source material, and that's why I did it.
Somebody else suggested that the book should have been from a single POV, but the movie itself made that impossible, as there's no one character who's in every scene. River comes the closest, but I think doing the entire novel in the POV of a crazy telepath would've been draining for both the writer and the reader.......
=-=-=-=-=
Thanks for the honest appraisals, folks! It's appreciated.
Keith R.A. DeCandido
keith@decandido.net
www.DeCandido.net | www.AlbeShiloh.com
www.livejournal.com/~kradical
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As someone who is not a published author but who has hung out with some notable ones over the years (including KRAD), what I've learned is writing ability cannot be taught. Grammar, spelling and syntax - yes. But actual writing ability, no.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Keith, you impress me again and again with your patience with the people who read your books. The fact that you can set aside the crap and vitriol and hold your temper, then actually respond not just rationally, but also politely! Good on ya.
BTW, I actually liked how the novel reflected the POV of the characters. That's one of the things I like about fiction - you can do that, and it makes the story more interesting. And, while in a short story, due to its length, I prefer one consistant POV; in a novel, the length can allow more freedom.
And I agree that following "rules" can strip a story of life. One thing I learnt in school was what the rules were. Later on, I learnt how to break them.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME