I've started working with an editor to polish up my first book, and I've discovered that my story might be in need of major revision. I could really use some help here, because she thinks that the pace isn't good enough and the plot is worn out so as to be boring. So I'll ask you not as writers, but as readers, what you think.

The premise of the series is a seventeen-year-old boy from a remote village finds a medallion that sends him on a quest. He's the chosen one to challenge the rise of the evil lord Vaulrod, who is moving to overtake the world. The books chronicle the quest first for the main character to become a wielder of the Blue Flame and then go on to face Vaulrod, and the war between the free realms and Vaulrod's army. There are elves, wizards, and men, as well as strange creatures both good and bad.

Based on that brief and badly written synopsis, what do you think? Is the theme too overdone to attempt again? Should I take out the idea of a dark lord and replace it with a different foe? Is the general idea too reminiscent of LOTR? Too trite and uninteresting? Is the style of writing popular in Tolkien's day (putting more emphasis on depth and description and less on excitement and pace, which is what I do) generally unappealing today?

From the perspective of a reader (you guys), is what I have interesting enough, or does it need work? I appreciate any feedback, because I could really use some help on this.

Thanks.
A distraught writer.

Hmm... Well, you're trying to self-publish, right? In terms of marketing and originality, I think as long as it isn't terribly cliche and with a worn-out plot (which I can't tell from a one-to-two sentence synopsis), it's more about showing the areas where your book is more original and interesting and marketing those differences.

I don't think you necessarily have to ditch the dark lord theme, but it might be helpful to replace it with a different kind of villain in order to try to avoid the LOTR general idea. I think that a lot of books, even when they're cliche, can become successful if they put a new twist into the cliche or if they're just marketed really well.

On depth/description v. excitement/pace, nearly every literary agent and publisher today will say that readers want excitement and pace versus depth and description. However, there are some authors who reject following this advice and manage to do well even with focusing on depth and description (such as N.D. Wilson).

In summary, making it less stereotypical wouldn't be a bad thing, but I don't think it is necessarily mandatory.

I agree with Rea. From the sounds of it the plot is nice and not too cliche, however I do think it borders along the lines of LOTR with the villian.

I read most of the first three chapters, and while the first chapter was well written and exciting, the second and third did drag a small bit. Perhaps editing and revision are in order, but I don't think the entire thing needs to be scrapped. *goes off to read the chapters again...*

Edit: Upon rereading the third chapter, I changed my mind. The pace works quite well. Yes, it's not explosions every other page (or even every couple pages ), but the plot is moving along and has definitely picked up. I think that anyone who works through it will enjoy it. Anyone who can't probably wouldn't enjoy the story to begin with.

Thanks for your insight, guys. I'm really grateful for it.

My editor gave me a list of things she though too closely paralleled LOTR:

Trekking to a river named Lenduin (although it's in the first book)
Elves
Land of elves is called Erladis (elvish version of Rivendell was Imladris)
The idea of a dark lord and a quest to save the world (saving the world, she said, is something that's been done well already, so my chances of success were, let's just say bad)
2 friends accompanying MC (like Merry and Pippin)
The 3 boys are saved by some members of a patroller/ranger type band (Aragorn helping hobbits)
Garaden (MC) was too shallow and didn't make the reader care about him. If you want to read the first 3 chapters to get an idea of this, they're posted over in the Novels subforum of the Fireside. *The Star Medallion*
Of course, the pacing is my biggest concern, because I wrote it in the older style of Tolkien, which apparently isn't too popular today

No, the old style struggles in today's society, unfortunately.

To be honest, any premise can sound cliche. In order to give you an informed opinion on pacing, themes, and if the plot is overused or boring I will need to actually read the book.

However, when I first read your synopsis this is what went through my mind:

The premise of the series is a seventeen-year-old boy from a remote village finds an [android] that sends him on a quest. He's the chosen one to challenge the rise of the evil [Darth Vader] who is moving to overtake the [universe]. The books chronicle the quest first for the main character to become a wielder of the [Force]and then go on to face [Vader}, and the war between the [Rebels] and [the Empire]. There are [aliens], [jedi], and men, as well as strange creatures both good and bad.

Is this cliched or bad? Depends on your writing. The structure for Star Wars is the Hero's Journey pattern and that pattern is widely used in all kinds of stories from all over the world. Does this mean you can't have the Hero's Journey story without being boring or cliched? Not at all. I mean, watch this 35 second video comparing the new Star Trek movie to Star Wars.

Yeah, they share similar themes, story structure, and arcs in the bare bones writing aspect, but both have unique characters, relationships, and story telling that makes both movies unique and stand apart.

*agrees*

I like that analogy you drew, Roager. It helps put it in perspective. The only difference being that Star Wars was sci-fi, and therefore automatically less cliche than a fantasy story doing what so many other fantasy stories have done before. At least the setting and style is different.

Regarding pacing, and today's pervasive desire for excitement, action, suspense at every turn, I agree that it's unfortunate. If you want people to read your books, to some extent you'll have to submit to the audience, if you will, and give them what they're looking for. The hard part is drawing the line between what the reader wants, and what you, as the author want. Is there any point in writing a book totally over-the-top with action and excitement if at the end of the day, it leaves you with a dissatisfied feeling? I think there's a balance between pleasing your readers, which is obviously a priority, and not surrendering your personal voice/style. That's the balance I'm struggling to find right now.

As I was going to mention in my review-of-'Radialloy'-that-I-have-not-written
-for-Grace-yet (:P), cliche things are not actually bad. I don't think they are bad at all. The only thing I don't like is a flat cliche thing. Do you see what I mean? Yes, there are completely new concepts that people come up with, and yes that is great, and very nice. but they don't have a monopoly on good books, or anything else.

So...yes, I think your plot is cliche overall. But you have a thousand and one (or was that a thousand and two? ) opportunities for making it a good book, and if you do that, then who cares if a lot of people write books with that same general plot line? They didn't write your book.

From what I have read of your book (the first three chapters), I do believe you need some more in depth characters. Your description is good, and I am one of the people who enjoy the old style, so that did not put me off (the definite majority of novels I read, and the vast majority of novels I really like, are old). I prefer books with more vibrancy and less loads of detail, however it is hard to draw a line for what makes a book on either side. But I think your pacing is fine. LotR wasn't the fastest paced book itself.

AMEN!!!! This is what I tell people all the time. Show me a book that doesn't have a cliché in it. Goodness, Tolkien wrote clichés too. It was how those clichés were presented that made his books great.

Thanks, Juliet. Good insights. I once heard a line that went something like "there are only 20 plotlines in the world, it's the variation that makes them interesting."


Therein lies my biggest problem. What percentage of readers in my targeted genre (epic fantasy/speculative fiction, Christian but not overtly) would have the same opinion? My editor's contention is that the style is too old to have a general appeal today, and since I'm writing to make some money at it, that's something I can't lightly pass over.

Her contention was that Tolkien would have had a hard time marketing LOTR in today's reader environment.

Hmmm. I honestly think that it is hard, but not impossible. You just have to be really good at it. In my opinion, N.D. Wilson is a Christian author who writes in a more deep/descriptive style similarish to Tolkien, and yet he has done very well in getting a lot of people interested in the book. I think the most important thing is to make sure you catch the reader by the description/teaser for the book and work hard to draw them in. I don't think it would be necessarily as easy as writing in a quick-cut-to-the-action, modern style, but I think it can be done. It's just about finding where your target audience is and marketing it really well...

EDIT: The Redwall series likewise are against the modern trend of quick-cut-to-the-action style... course the reason they're popular may be more attributed to other reasons...Namely, that they're targeted to an age group where generally the parents more pick the books for the kids to read rather than the kids picking them for themselves, so parents aren't as much looking for the modern style of writing

Good points, Aratrea. Marketing to a targeted audience, and doing it well, is the recipe for any success. I'm just worried that as my series stands, I could do that, but not to the extent of success that I'm aiming for. Another thing, if you catch the reader with a compelling blurb, then your book had better be able to deliver the goods. Of course, "the goods" will be defined differently by everyone, thus my dilemma.

Show me a book without clichés in it and I'll show you a blank pamphlet.

Um...all that to say I agree with Juliet and Airi.

I enjoyed your style, but...yeah, I guess I'm not the average person. Still, I don't think you need to write a thriller or necessarily action-packed book to succeed, even though the older style is struggling now. There are other ways to make people want to read the book. Character depth is just one of those.

To some extent, cliches are unavoidable, but my books have too many, making them seem derivatives of LOTR. The other twist is that I'm guessing most HWers aren't "normal" readers. If I can't reach a wide readership because my style is only suited to the old way of writing, then I feel as if I've failed to some extent. I want to write books that people will read and love, and the more the merrier. I don't have to abandon my style in favor of the cliff-hanger, suspenseful, action-packed, pace-driven approach, but I need to refocus the way I deal with prose to be more compelling. Deep characters is one of the ways for me to improve. My editor isn't advocating pure thrill without content, but rather more conflict, especially on the level of the characters. I can still use beautifully written descriptions, but the redundancies and unimportant parts need to be taken out in favor of tension and intrigue that always move the story forward.

And that's my big ramble for the night. I need to go to bed now.

*nods* Yeah, that makes sense.

I loved your style. One thing I like about LOTR is that you can read it over and over again and still come away with something you didn't notice the last gazillion times you read it. Some books you just can't do that with and you can only read once.

Hallelujah! Thank goodness for Eleutheria!

I know this will sound strange, but I can't tell you how glad I am you posted that. I don't want everyone to tell me my books are great unless they are. I want honest opinions, even if it would seem discouraging. That's exactly the kind of opinion I need to get an idea of where people stand. Of course I can't please everyone, but my goal is to reach as many readers as possible, so I'm glad you answered the question I wondered about the most: will I turn people off by publishing a book that resembles LOTR.

I know the premise is cliche, and referring back to earlier conversations, that isn't my editor's main concern. She's worried that I'm deriving too much from LOTR, which might come across as plagiarism, which is obviously the last thing I want. Cliches to some extent are unavoidable, but when the core plot of the book has been done, there's probably need for change.

Bah, I wish I had the time to read that for you. I will as soon as possible; poke me in a week if I haven't.

Same here.
I pretty much agree with everyone else. There are so many books in the world, you can't write something totally unique. But you do need to put your own twist on it. *beats dead horse*

I agree.

*goes searching for an extra long stick*

Thus, my fate...