Your point about interiority makes a lot of sense. When a character moves through danger or emotional moments without any inner response, it’s hard for readers to feel stakes no matter how dramatic the situation is on paper. The contrast between the two POV styles sounds especially noticeable, since one invites you into a mind while the other keeps you at arm’s length. Action alone rarely builds attachment; it’s the meaning the character assigns to it that does. Curious whether you’d have connected more with Ferris if her perspective had included even small flashes of memory or self-reflection.
I am also wondering about why the editors allowed such a disparity get past them. I would find that very disappointing and jarring as well. I admit, I have not read a lot of collaborative works. Although, I did almost start writing one with a friend of mine. However I would have been the lead writer, while she did a lot of the world building. Alas, we drifted before realizing our dreams.
To be fair, we were teenagers to young adults.
I have found a lot of first person stories risk coming out flat when they want it to be accessible to people who want to 'self insert'. Since I do not do this, I read stories because I am interested in characterization, I find it off-putting.
That's a good point about the self insert, now I'm wondering if that's it. Don't need to add backstory and thoughts if it's your own backstory and thoughts!
At least an author's self-insert might actually have a personality and feelings. But I have observed a trend in Romance in specific of creating these blend first person accounts of a character that is so neutral and devoid of any strong feeling or opinion that almost any reader could pick up and imagine themself as that person. It is easy to fill in the blanks of what isn't there then to overwrite what is. It is a marketing strategy. Unfortunately, as you observed, it results in a very unfulfilling narrative for the rest of us.
I think it's a risk to joint publish anything (this coming from me of all people enjoys a colab) but from side of things it's a contrast someone's more polished nuance alongside my often let's vomit on a page and try and make sense of everything.
But that's for here. For something commercial and published I think it'd need more then a vibe approach. It's a shame that the quality disparity undercut the ambition. Going under the assumption it was run past an editor do you think they were aware of the dichotomy or just went well ball
I wondered about editors because I would have thought they’d want to make the book consistent?? These authors apparently have done another series together that’s popular so maybe editors just gave them a pat on the back for previous success, she’ll be right.
Your point about interiority makes a lot of sense. When a character moves through danger or emotional moments without any inner response, it’s hard for readers to feel stakes no matter how dramatic the situation is on paper. The contrast between the two POV styles sounds especially noticeable, since one invites you into a mind while the other keeps you at arm’s length. Action alone rarely builds attachment; it’s the meaning the character assigns to it that does. Curious whether you’d have connected more with Ferris if her perspective had included even small flashes of memory or self-reflection.
I am also wondering about why the editors allowed such a disparity get past them. I would find that very disappointing and jarring as well. I admit, I have not read a lot of collaborative works. Although, I did almost start writing one with a friend of mine. However I would have been the lead writer, while she did a lot of the world building. Alas, we drifted before realizing our dreams.
To be fair, we were teenagers to young adults.
I have found a lot of first person stories risk coming out flat when they want it to be accessible to people who want to 'self insert'. Since I do not do this, I read stories because I am interested in characterization, I find it off-putting.
I'm sure it would have been a best seller 😉
That's a good point about the self insert, now I'm wondering if that's it. Don't need to add backstory and thoughts if it's your own backstory and thoughts!
At least an author's self-insert might actually have a personality and feelings. But I have observed a trend in Romance in specific of creating these blend first person accounts of a character that is so neutral and devoid of any strong feeling or opinion that almost any reader could pick up and imagine themself as that person. It is easy to fill in the blanks of what isn't there then to overwrite what is. It is a marketing strategy. Unfortunately, as you observed, it results in a very unfulfilling narrative for the rest of us.
Love it. Aahhh! \o/
I think it's a risk to joint publish anything (this coming from me of all people enjoys a colab) but from side of things it's a contrast someone's more polished nuance alongside my often let's vomit on a page and try and make sense of everything.
But that's for here. For something commercial and published I think it'd need more then a vibe approach. It's a shame that the quality disparity undercut the ambition. Going under the assumption it was run past an editor do you think they were aware of the dichotomy or just went well ball
I wondered about editors because I would have thought they’d want to make the book consistent?? These authors apparently have done another series together that’s popular so maybe editors just gave them a pat on the back for previous success, she’ll be right.