This weekend my book, Broken Glass, is available for free on Amazon.
I would love to have you “buy” a copy. It actually helps me in a few ways. First, the more people who “buy” it, the more likely it is the book will get to the “best in free” category—which increases exposure dramatically. Second, your purchase makes it more likely that the book will show up in the “people who bought this also purchased” toolbar on Amazon. Third, the more feedback I get about the book the more I can learn from the experience. You can buy the book through the link below. And there’s a fourth way it helps which I’ll get into momentarily.
Now I want to speak bluntly about the book.
It’s Not Great
I went into this briefly in a previous entry, but basically, this is not a brilliant book. I’ve written better work since, though none of that work is at the necessary level of polish to publish. Broken Glass represents a phase in my development as a writer, and working on it was worthwhile. However, I have trouble convincing myself to promote the book when I feel I can do much better.
Here’s my honest opinion: At the micro and macro levels, this book makes a strong showing. The problems with the book are global. The plot was the one that mattered—that seems significant—to my 18-year-old self. Well, eight years will do a lot to a person’s perspective, especially when those 8 years are the early twenties.
What are these global problems? Theme, unity, structure, the actual core of the plot. Do I mean these are absolutely terrible elements? No, but they are deeply troubled. The book is thematically disjointed, jumping from action to philosophical exploration to romance to humor. More important than the variety of tones, themes, and elements is how thin the connections between them are.
What’s Wrong with My Story?
When I started writing this book I was just coming to realizing how deeply I could dive into difficult emotions through fiction. In Broken Glass, I do that much successfully. The book is “intense,” and the emotional journey is in some sense profound. It dives into challenging emotions in an attempt to find answers. This alone is enough to turn off some readers. My favorite review of the book so far says reading Broken Glass ”felt more like work. Hard work. And, while Broken Glass did not appeal to me, it may appeal to readers who want to spend a few dark, dry, introspective hours curled up with a good bottle of painkillers and a copy of Aristotle’s greatest hits.” She noted that her 2-star rating felt generous.
Among the problems, though, is that the protagonist never finds those answers in a coherent, substantial form. I’m not saying you always have to provide solid answers, but if the book is about these questions you should have something to say by the end—even if that “something” is about the inability to find solid answers. The emotional journey fails to acknowledge this.
I saw these issues when I went through my final round of edits. However, rather than gutting the original plot, I remained loyal to it. After dozens of drafts and years of off-and-on attention, I had a sense of obligation to put out the book as I’d originally imagined it. If I were to start that process over, I would gut the story ruthlessly. I simply would not write this plot right now.
Several of the reviewers so far have said the story was “too complex.” I think they’re actually a touch off in identifying the problem. The difficulty isn’t that the types of thought are too complicated but that, without a strong bearing to the core of the story—without having a strong core of the story to being with—these elements are confusing, feel distracting, and are difficult to “place” within the framework of the story itself.
Re-Thinking the Story
I’m not committed to this idea, but I keep having this thought: If I re-wrote Broken Glass and made the sort of global changes I feel are necessary, then re-published the story under a different name, I would have the chance for a powerful side-by-side comparison of reader responses. It could become a significant learning experience for me and a way to test my theories on why the book is problematic as it currently stands.
If I were to re-write the story, what would be different? First, I wouldn’t kill a character on the first page. I might not kill him at all. I would walk Socrates (if he was still named Socrates) up the street, have him plant the gun in Jake’s chest, and then begin my exposition.
I would use multiple narrators. I would definitely cut more of the Socrates story itself since much of it fails to build anything of significance for the main plot. I would work toward greater thematic unity in exploring the question of redemption. I would tone down just how philosophical and intellectual the characters are and use the multiple narrators to balance the philosophical voices with the more sense-oriented voices. I would cut much of the philosophy.
Reading and giving feedback on the “original version” is the fourth way you can help me. If I’m doing this re-write experiment, I have a reason to promote the book: The more data I get on Broken Glass as a “control,” the more sure I can be of the difference in reader reaction. So, again, you can grab the book for free this weekend.
I’m not committed to this experiment. I have other stories to write, other projects that deserve my attention. However, I feel the learning opportunity is worth exploring. Are you interested in seeing me do that? Do you want to follow my gutting and re-working of the story so you can take advantage of some of that learning for yourself? Let me know. Your interest will help determine whether or not I pursue that project.
Write on,
Rob
The post Broken Glass Giveaway appeared first on Rob D Young.