Learning and Moving Forward

For my second novel, I am in the process of dissecting two of my favorite novels by two of my favorite authors, books I have read multiple times each, so I can full understand how they work, more so, than perhaps, I do already--I have actually written a paper on one for a linguistics class. Actually, I have written two papers on works by that author, so I am already well familiar with how his style works, more or less. My goal is to immerse myself in these novels so I can draw as much influence from them as I am able. I already have my novel all plotted out, but studying these works will allow me to hone what I have planned already and, when I am actually writing it, use what I have learned and absorbed to write the best novel that I am capable of writing, currently.

One thing that really click for me over the last few months has to do with editing, which I will be able to use, not only when I am editing this novel, but also when I am writing it. I have figured out my process and I feel confident in it, and know that I can produce top quality work, which, even though I believe I could get it published, I am going to self-publish, since one of my goals is to change the way people perceive self-published novels--that they don't all have to be genre fiction in order to draw an audience, and that they can be well-written and intellectually challenging.

My goal as a writer is to produce works of artistic and literary merit, that go beyond mere entertainment and escapism, to push boundaries, to challenge people to think differently and go outside of their worldview and see life from a different perspective.

It feels good to be figuring things out, making decisions, and doing what I have to do to move forward in my life, professionally and personally, and as a writer. Even though I am only a hobbyist, I do take what I write seriously, and I try to push myself constantly to be better than I am, and that will likely never change.

Choosing A Choice

While it is entirely arbitrary to most people, my gut instinct is telling me that, if I am going to take one version of Out in the Garage off-sale, it is going to be the second edition. While that might seem counter-intuitive, I do have what I feel is solid reasoning to support why I would do this, which I guess makes it more than just gut instinct, but, hey, you know, whatever... It really all comes down to the fact that I never should have written the second edition in the first place. I should have just stood behind the first edition and not let what other people think bother me, since there are plenty of people who read it and liked it. While it might not conform to contemporary ideals, that is not necessarily a bad thing, and I have spent much more time reading and studying literature that was written well before I was born, and my biggest influences as a writer were either well dead or quite old when I was born. I studied literature, I didn't go through an MFA program, and, as of now, I don't intend to. Not that there anything wrong with getting an MFA, it is just not my choice. I believe, and have been taught, even by people with MFAs, that the best way to learn how to write is to study how writers you like do it, and then do it, and do it, and do it. So that is what I am doing. When I started writing Out in the Garage, I didn't know what I was doing (and some would argue that I still don't, but hey, whatever, you can't please everybody), and, over the course of writing, editing, rewriting, and editing, over and over again, I, sort of, developed my artistic vision for it, which I then compromised when I decided to rewrite and edit and make the changes that I did to get the second edition. While yes, in theory, the changes were designed to make it more marketable, it was really just stupid and weak on my part. The first edition, for all its faults, is genuine. When I finished it, it felt finished. I just lack the self-confidence to not continuously second guess myself, which I am trying to change. Anyways, I like the first edition, and if I have to choose one (which I don't, really), it is the one that I am going to choose.

Genrefication

While I might not be rewriting or re-editing Out in the Garage these days, I am still attempting to hone my publishing and marketing of it, seeing what is working and what isn't, and one area where I struggle still is fitting it into a genre. I started out very generally describing it as literary fiction, but that isn't really working, so, after thinking long and hard about it, I have gotten a bit more specific.

The first edition I am going with coming of age and satire as the genres, since, because of the structure and the additional parts, is more general than the second edition. Even though the genres are still pretty general, they are a better fit than literary fiction or general fiction. Coming of Age works for the genre because it is, on the surface, about a teenager dealing with changes in his life and transitioning into adulthood. Satire is also an accurate description, since, as Wikipedia describes, "vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government or society itself, into improvement." While this was more obvious in the original Escapes version, it is still pretty evident if you read through the layers and don't just taking it at face value. At least I think it is pretty evident, anyways.

The second edition, like the first edition, is still labelled a satire, for the same sort of reasons, but because of the focus, and the structure, the other genre that best describes it is young adult/juvenile fiction -- visionary and metaphysical. Since much of the story is the mental journey of a young adult character through his life, which comes across as a sort of dream-like, altered state of reality, and is written in a way that might appeal more to an adult audience that reads young adult fiction, it made sense for me to label it in this way.

No matter what genre is the most appropriate, both versions are heavily allegorical and can be read as extended metaphors, and, unless I am mistaken, this is not something that many writers are doing nowadays. It is not necessarily uncommon, but it isn't exactly what the academy is teaching, either. I suppose that it would make sense that I would write in such a way, since I am most familiar with literature from the 19th and before, when it was more commonplace. Herman Melville, as many of you are probably aware, is one of my bigger influences, and it would be very difficult to read Moby Dick and make much sense out of it without reading it as being an extended metaphor, and the same goes for much of his other work. I mean, try making sense out of The Confidence Man without reading it allegorically.

While perhaps it is an outmoded way to write, it is what came naturally to me when I was writing it, and writing allegorically, for me, was a good way to make social and cultural criticism and also tell a story that makes sense on a surface level. While I do want my readers to read (either version) allegorically, and I hope that they do, it is not necessarily necessary, either.

In the end, classifying it as one genre or another doesn't really change the novel itself, but readers' expectations on what they are getting, and how they know they are supposed to read what they are purchasing. I am hoping, by seeking out the most specific genre where it fits, I will be able to find the right set of readers, who will read it as it is intended to be read. 

While I can't control exactly how people read it, finding the right genre does help lead the reader in the right direction, and that's all I really can do. I just need to do it more effectively.