In the intro to The Shining, Stephen King said this:
I think that in every writer’s career — usually early in it — there comes a “crossroads novel,” where the writer is presented with a choice: either do what you have done before, or try to reach a little higher. What you realize only in retrospect is how important that choice is.
The Shining was King’s “crossroads novel,” and he goes on to explain how he chose to “try to reach a little higher.” In his case, it meant taking a risk with one of his leads and, rather than simply just show the man becoming possessed, probing the psychology that turned this character into a psychopath. It took more work, and set King out on a limb he was not at all used to.
I find Stephen King’s observation rather fascinating, this idea of a “crossroads novel,” that early in our career we are confronted with a chance to either
- Do what we’re used to, what we know works, or
- Reach a little higher, take risks, stretch ourselves.
This quote came to mind today when I read a question issued in one of the writer’s chat groups I frequent. Someone asked: “Do you think a person’s 1st novel is easier to write than their 2nd, and why?” Here’s part of my answer:
… I would definitely say I had a much harder time with my second novel for several reasons. Typically, first novels are not written under a deadline; the writer has the “freedom” to approach the story more leisurely. Not so with contracted novels. You do not have the luxury of creative lollygagging.
Secondly, my second novel was harder because I wanted it to be better than my first. So I purposely pushed myself to tackle bigger characters, a bigger plot, multiple POV’s, and other elements I had not attempted in my first novel.
In this sense, my second novel is my “crossroads novel” in that I intentionally did not rest on what had sold the first novel. I wanted MORE — more POV’s, more romance, bigger ideas, a wilder plot, and a bigger story.
And did I say “more romance”?
I wonder that we writers tend to settle for “what we’re used to, what we know works,” rather than to step out of our comfort zones. We gravitate to stories and characters that we know we can pull off, rather than tackle “a bigger plot,” we settle for the manageable. Instead of trying to “reach a little higher,” we aim low, because we know we can hit it.
So have you reached your “crossroads novel”? And, if so, what is the “choice” you have been “presented with” on that crossroad?
Ironically, my “crossroads” novel I left off this past summer, lingering between third and fourth drafts, because I realized that what I was trying to do wasn’t in my reach, yet. Nonlinear, spiritual, hopeful…just wasn’t something I could do up to my own standards. That’s the biggest reason why I set it aside and commenced on the “Billy the Kid” project, because Billy the Kid is straight-forward, pulpy, fun – and within my reach, right now. That other thing is too big, too personal, too close for me to think about it right. Hopefully, I’ll get back to it in a year or two.
I don’t think I’ve reached that point in development. I’ve written 2 & 1/2 novels, the second of which is in process of publication. It’s that 1/2 one that worries me…because it’s a sequel. And I struggle with questions of “how do you make a sequel as entertaining & fresh as the original?” There’s something special about meeting characters for the first time that’s very hard to duplicate in a series.
And since I’m a slow, painstaking writer, your observation about “the freedom to approach the story more leisurely” raises a point that has always concerned me. So many second novels I’ve read seem rushed, and consequently less engaging than an author’s first.
Maybe Harper Lee had it right…
I suppose that would require having at least one published novel under my belt, so I can’t totally relate.
I am, however, constantly pushing myself to write something different than I’ve written before. As an unpublished author it’s a little frustrating, because readers tend to approach my work as if it’s my “first”. As if this is the first short story or novel I’ve ever written.
I went thru a period of dabbling in satire, now I’m going thru a “stark” period. A recent critique I recieved from someone who’s read two of my stories (the “stark” ones) was something like…”I know short sentences are your style and it’s a valid style, but…”
Actually, I didn’t know short sentences were my style. In this case, I was experimenting with mood, trying to create a certain ambience. (The fact that is was overdone to the point of being tiring…okay, valid critique.)
Perhaps published authors run into this as well. Your audience naturally assumes you have one style or approach and might become befuddled if/when you stray from it? Expect some moaning from those who don’t appreciate curve balls, I guess.
I am just on my first novel, but already noticing how I am pushing myself for deeper characters, plot, and rich storyline. I want to send this one out traditionally but am so nervous and doubtful.
Either way I know I have to push 100% to each book equally, perhaps the next book I’ll push 200% 🙂
Great post, Mike!
This is part of the problem with doinking around with rough drafts forever. Or maybe it’s part of the blessing.
Novels that I started ten years ago I end up revisiting when a subsequent work brings me to a crossroads point. I happen to think the old works benefit from the retouching, but it does stand in the way of me getting anything finished. And since I’m not George Lucas I don’t think I can release something only to keep re-releasing it with changes down the road.
I hope this isn’t the crossroads where you sell your soul to the devil (seriously, because now that TN is printing satanic bibles . . .)!
hey there jill, do you mean thomas nelson? what do you mean, “satanic bibles?” like salmon rushdie?
Heather, I think Jill is referencing a topic I referenced on my Facebook page the other day about the acquisition of Thomas Nelson by Harper Collins.
I can’t link to the FB page post, but does this have something to do w/TN now owning NIV and KJV rights?
Kinda. TN was recently bought by HC. Allegedly, HC has published Anton LaVey’s Satanic Bible. Thus, a Christian publisher is owned by the same group that publishes Satanic Bibles. But I brought up the topic tongue-in-cheek on FB believing the charge is skewed.
aHA!!! interesting.
And, of course, I was making a joke, too. Just to keep that straight.