That time of year again, eh?
This book has been less stressful, overall. The text is shorter, easier to format, much more streamline, and thus less costly to edit and purchase proofs to verify CreateSpace hasn’t boned me on page numbers again (we’ll see Tuesday or Wednesday). I’ve paid off my car and been promoted, so I actually have a lot more wiggle room financially for things like the cover and edits, but the promotion comes with intense and insane constraints on my time. We’ll see how future sequels go, but for now most of my time is spent studying. We’ll see how much this harshes my writing.
I won’t be using Smashwords for the near future, but might after a few rounds exclusive with Amazon. We’ll see. Nothing against Smashwords, I just got a fraction of the sales by comparison to Amazon.
I won’t be using any online book clubs or forums because even with quality reviews I didn’t see any real benefits from those, just cash and time sinks. That and ignoids that wanted to leave pointless and ridiculous comments without even reading the book.
Fascinating, yes?
Recently, I learned of “Five Nights at Freddy’s”, the corresponding sequels, and how they’re more fun to watch others play than to actually dive into. Yes, I have a point in all this, I promise. The sequels are similar to the first, with minor tweaks and enhancements. Most authors, I’ve found, tend to work within this tract. Adam Sandler, for instance, is pretty notorious for using the same shtick over and over to churn our films, get paid, and not really need to put forth much effort. Nicholas Sparks has written the same book over and over and gotten rich and famous as a result. While the creator of FNAF clearly has put more effort into his games than Adam Sandler has since his “music career”, what I’m getting at is that both have, in their own ways, found a formula that works and mined it for a career.
I’m almost annoyed that this sort of route isn’t available to me. Granted, certain themes will continue to come up in my books, particularly elements like power and prejudice and fallacious thinking, but I’ll never really get to recycle the same formula or dramatic beats in the same fashion with this series particularly as it follows a trajectory related to…. well, that would be telling. This isn’t a kind of “humble brag”, cause inevitably this means some of my books will work much better than others for any given reader. Ironically, I bring this up on a book I believe will work better for most readers, but we’ll see.
“Chasms” follows a life cycle. Death (Necropolis as Nursing Home), rebirth and infancy and childhood and teens (Lunacy), school and learning (Absurdity), adulthood and employment and finally mastery, with all this going on before the backdrop of one world dying and moving into a transition period (presumably to a later rebirth). As such, there are moments that are quick and fun with others that are slow or painful, and all the other complications that come with life. “Chasms” isn’t and wasn’t ever meant to be a quick, taut read – life is neither fast nor efficient.
“Currents” is stream-lined and a much faster trip. The story loosely parallels the Major Arcana of the Tarot. There’s a sense of inevitability and determinism, like a self-imposed destiny that leads somewhere the protagonist doesn’t want but can’t avoid on her own. There’s more a three act structure that readers tend to be familiar with. That said, everything is turned upside down. A more accurate description would be that the story loosely parallels the Major Arcana where most or all the cards are inverted and askew.
Now that I’ve thrilled myself to death with this post, I’ve got to get back to work. Hopefully, my proof will turn out well and I’ll get the book out ahead of time. I’ll keep this blog posted, though not for any useful reason since I’m probably the only person that’s ever gone here. Ah well…
Till next time when I’ll be more awake and less weary. -GJS
