Sigh.

Tonight I made the mistake of asking my IRL critique group how my WIP compares to what I've written before--was it better, worse, or about the same.

They kind of looked at each other and said that they'd liked the romances better. Which surprised me, because I have so much more enthusiasm for what I'm writing now and feel more at home with my voice, and I was sure that was coming through on the page.

With one, I just don't think she's my natural reader for the new project. She liked my more domestic romance, the one with a house party and balls and pretty dresses, better than my starcrossed lovers in the Peninsular War, and she says with this story she's too busy trying to keep track of which parts are real and which ones I've invented. (She doesn't know enough history to do what I was hoping readers would do--recognize the two really famous real names among my cast but realize that the events are askew from page one.)

One of them said that she could tell I was having a grand time with the intellectual puzzle I've set myself of rewriting a big chunk of history, but that the emotional connection with the characters isn't there yet, and that's what she's loved about my writing in the past. She said that even with the romances, the emotional layer was generally the last thing to fall into place as I polished the work, so she's confident I'll figure out how to get it onto the page by the time it's ready to submit.

But...but...it still wasn't the answer I was expecting. I've felt so much more free that I was sure that exuberance was coming through on the page and strengthening the writing.

Sigh

she doesn't know enough history to do what I was hoping readers would do--recognize the two really famous real names among my cast but realize that the events are askew from page one.

You know, that is a lot to ask of a reader; most U.S. readers quite frankly are ignorant of U.S. history - let alone the history of Europe. If your names are famous enough, maybe a majority of your readers will recognize them (though even at this point I bet a large minority won't.) But being able to note that something is askew? Sorry, that is a tiny fraction of a fraction of the audience.

Let me put it this way: pretend your story is set in a small Irish village in 1849. It is a peaceful time in Ireland, England and Europe; and the story is a comic one about the rivalry between an Irish pub keeper Arthur Wellesley, and a little Corsican immigrant who runs a pastry shop. I'd be willing to bet a majority of the potential audience for this could not tell you exactly what is wrong with this picture. I suspect a substantial minority would not even get an uneasy feeling that anything was askew about it.

Well know writing rule: never assume your audience is stupid, but most of the time do assume they are ignorant.

never assume your audience is stupid, but most of the time do assume they are ignorant.

I know. It's just a challenge with the type of story I'm writing, because I can't spell out everything that's wrong in my world without breaking POV, given that my characters don't know they're living in an alternate reality.

And the biggest change I've made is obvious enough for everyone who's read it so far, even the history-clueless. But this one particular reader gets distracted by wondering whether every single little detail really happened or not, which characters are real vs. which ones I've invented, etc. I guess it could mean that the characters aren't coming to life enough, but unless other readers make similar comments, I'm going to chalk it up to You Can't Please Everybody. (My other CPs don't necessarily know what's real and what's invented either, but they either don't care or figure that's what wikipedia and my eventual author website are for.)

But this one particular reader gets distracted by wondering whether every single little detail really happened or not, which characters are real vs. which ones I've invented, etc

I have a tendency to get hung up on that with historical AUs (which I am quite fond of). A short appendix noting what's different and who was real satisfies me. Were you planning on including something like that when the work itself is finished? You might ask that reader if that would help her (even though you don't have it written for her to flip to at present, of course).

Well, I'm assuming how much of an appendix or author's note I'd get is up to the publisher if I find one. I'm definitely planning to have my story vs. the real story be a big feature on my website.

Is that sort of thing up to the publisher? I have no idea. Website would certainly work for me. Ask her to assume she would have that as a resource and can she just read for the story (or whatever kind of feedback you are actually looking for), maybe.

Seeing the Nutcracker on TV tonight reminded me of plot bunny I've had for some time I could never get to gel - a Goth Nutcracker. It actually fits very well superficially. Rat Kings were an gross urban myth associated with plague conditions [link] (note: really no need to follow the link. This is not an ita link but it could be. ) And I can see the rosy cheeked sugar plum fairies as plague spirits. So the whole story becomes one of war and plague. But I can't really get beyond the vague idea to a real plot. But I have a feeling something could be done -- something with the feel of grotesque beauty the best Tim Burton films, and best Clive Barker novels provide. If anyone has some ideas that move it forward and make it gel great. And if sparks anything for anyone else - well I feel the value of half-formed ideas is a dime a ton, so help yourself.

Oh gosh yes. I just got a flash of the sugar-plum fairy as a spider queen and all the little children under her petticoats wee spiders. (she's the one with all the kids under her skirt, right?)

See, you coulda gotten Jilli's help on this, but no more.

See, you coulda gotten Jilli's help on this, but no more.

Oh I think Jilli will want to offer an alternative to making Shelob the a star of the story.