by Jason Joyner | Oct 17, 2007 | Blog, CFBA, fiction, reading, reviews
This week the CFBA Tour is highlighting the latest release from Brandilyn Collins, book 3 in the Kanner Lake series entitled Crimson Eve.
The book again focuses on one of the characters that hang out at the Java Joint in fictional Kanner Lake, Idaho. Through the fictional, yet real Scenes and Beans blog, we’ve come to know the crowd at Java Joint. However, we may not know very much about all of the posters. This time, realator Carla Radling is showing off a high-end house on the lake shore when the prospective buyer levels a gun at her. A mystery from her past has come back to haunt her, and powerful people want her dead.
Crimson Eve is part of a series, yet it is easy to read it on its own without having read the prior books, Violet Dawn and Coral Moon. Brandilyn is known for Seatbelt Suspense™, and this book does not disappoint. She is a master at taking plot twists and spinning the reader around until they have no idea what to expect. Crimson Eve starts in the first chapter by grabbing a hold, and the book doesn’t let up until the final chapter – really! There are surprises through to the very end.
Brandilyn continues with her strength of characterization as well. Her characters have believable motivations, and you find yourself torn even on behalf of the bad guy. The audience will be invested not only in what happens in the roller-coster plot, but in caring about what happens to the citizens of Kanner Lake.
There are a couple of plot twists that are a litte unbelievable, but the enjoyment of the read keeps you engaged throughout the book. I recommend this book heartily to fans of well-written books, but especially to those looking for some great suspense.
“Collins tops herself by creating a suspenseful nonstop thrill ride … Truly the best Christian Fiction suspense title so far this year.” – Library Journal, starred review
Also, Brandilyn has a special offer that you can’t beat. Check this out!
Do you know someone who’s never read a Brandilyn Collins novel? Surely no such person exists. However, should you scrounge up such a friend—someone who enjoys suspense—here’s a special offer from Brandilyn. Be among the first 50 people between now and October 21, 2007 to e-mail her assistant at gayle.brandilyncollins@gmail.com with the person’s name, e-mail address and street address. (Due to exorbitant overseas mailing costs, United States residents only, please).
A signed copy of Crimson Eve will be sent to your friend—free—along with an e-mail from Brandilyn announcing the book is on its way, courtesy of you. (Don’t worry. Brandilyn won’t spam these email addresses. She just wants your friend to know who to thank.) No worries that this story is third in the Kanner Lake series. Each book stands alone. Brandilyn is convinced your friend will so love Crimson Eve, he/she will surely reciprocate with expensive chocolate.
by Jason Joyner | Sep 17, 2007 | Blog, books, publishing, reading, resources, writing craft
Here’s an interesting article concerning Christian publishing. It doesn’t specifically reference the fiction side of things, but if a big advance is going to certain people, then it makes sense that it would leave less money all around, including the fiction set.
by Jason Joyner | Sep 17, 2007 | Blog, books, publishing, reading, resources, writing craft
Here’s an interesting article concerning Christian publishing. It doesn’t specifically reference the fiction side of things, but if a big advance is going to certain people, then it makes sense that it would leave less money all around, including the fiction set.
by Jason Joyner | Aug 22, 2007 | Blog, CSFF, fantasy, fiction, reading, writing craft
Yesterday I tried to leave my post on the CSFF Blog Tour book Legend of the Firefish by George Bryan Polivka as a cliffhanger to pique interest. I discussed the strengths that I saw in the book and what made it an enjoyable read. Today I’m going to touch three points that dragged the book down for me a little that kept it from being one of my top books of the year (so far).
The first and second points are interrelated. As I mentioned yesterday, the book’s two major characters are unapologetically Christian, and they live consistently in this and it fits the story well. However, some of the story suffers slightly because of one of the character’s reliance on God’s sovereignty and will. This is tricky to discuss, because I believe in the message the author is saying behind it. The problem is that it sometimes hinders the action of the protaganist as he stops and contemplates what he does. There are several instances where Packer wrestles with High Ideals – nothing wrong with that. The trick is when he does it with chaos raging around him. I might use this aspect once or twice, but it happens a few times and slows down several action sequences.
Also, the use of this plot point somtimes stops Packer from acting, since “all is God’s will and he is leaving it in His hands”. It has some important consequences at the end, but again it happens enough that it bumps the flow of the story and the believability of the scene.
These two points aren’t terribly significant, but they were “hiccups” in the story for me. The final point is significant, but is also an interesting point of topic.
A little background: an author has to chose a point-of-view (POV) when writing. Typically the author picks either first or third-person. First person usually sticks with one character throughout the book. Third person can stay with one person, or move around to different characters. However, usually a change of character POV happens at a chapter or a definite point in a chapter.
Polivka just doesn’t “break” this rule, he demolishes it. He takes an omniscient viewpoint, meaning he switches POV whenever he wants, sometimes from paragraph to paragraph.
For me, I did not enjoy this. It has the effect of confusing who is doing the talking/thinking – especially when Packer is with guys or Panna with any ladies. It comes across as “head-hopping.” It really took me a while to get the hang of it, so I read the first part of the book slowly, not really getting into it until later on.
Now, when I approached the tour I knew I would blog about this, but I was just going to chalk it up to something Polivka would have to work on. However, over the last week I’ve read a few things that gave me a different slant on it.
1. From Mike Duran at Decompose:
From Day 1: When one lives under the notion that success means strict adherence to a set of rules — as this published author clearly implies — a type of literary legalism follows. Am I suggesting there aren’t things that tighten a story, make it more readable, more cohesive? Heck no. What I’m wondering is if this idea of “rules” is over-emphasized to new authors. The result is — as it was for me — that a lot of new authors live under the burden of legalism…
From Day 3: The writing rules have their place, but they can also blind one to the destination. After all, the ultimate goal of the storyteller is not to obey all the rules, but to get her readers safely across the street.
2. Then there was Becky Miller’s interview with Nick Harrison, Polivka’s editor from Harvest House:
Bryan’s ability to handle the point of view shifts necessary to pull off this feat [using so many POV’s] is awesome—and unique. Not many authors handle point of view as well as Bryan does. I consider Bryan’s use of point of view a huge asset to the book—even though I know that all the writing books warn against such shifts. I think they do this because few authors can handle those shifts well. Bryan is a master at it, in my opinion.
3. Finally, there’s Bryan Polivka’s own comments in an interview with Valerie Comer:
As for the omniscient point of view, I find that other writers and publishers are very interested in that whole discussion, but I’ve never yet had a pure reader (who is not also a writer) even ask me about it. It seems odd to me that this should be out of style, or out of favor, particularly in a world where movies and television are having great success with omniscience. Lost, Friends, Rent, Oceans Eleven, even Survivor and Real World–I would argue that any ensemble-cast product gets its appeal from going deep into multiple points of view. Fiction writers are, I think, well behind the times in that regard if they hew to a single viewpoint thinking it is somehow better for the audience. I may not have done it well, but I hope that doesn’t put anyone off the approach itself.
And the Christian viewpoint factors in here also. Historically, I believe the omniscient viewpoint went out of favor as secular existentialism took over the mainstream, based on a philosophy that we really can’t know anything outside our own single point of reference. And I think that’s just incorrect. The reason we have imagination, I believe, is for the apprehension of the infinite. God gave His creation this gift that we might know Him. And if we can know God, surely we can know others.
Now, armed with all of this information and opinion, I made an adjustment to my opinion. The thing that especially struck me was Bryan’s contention that basically he’s using an older style and we’re conditioned to accept a status quo that this “shouldn’t be done”. Especially with the discussion Mike Duran has been having at his blog.
I’ve argued before that authors need the freedom to create as they feel called and are inspired. I applaud Polivka for making a challenging artistic stand and sticking with it. Since it was intentional, I can’t fault it.
Nick Harrison thought that Bryan pulled this off well. There I might disagree some. I’ve seen other books that switch through a lot of POV’s and I didn’t get lost. My favorite book of the year so far, Abiding Darkness by John Aubrey Anderson, has some occasional POV hops and doesn’t suffer from it. Interestingly enough, I would say that Anderson’s hops were likely more accidental, while Polivka’s were intentional, and that it is apparent in reading. Again, it didn’t work for me 100%.
SO…is this a big deal? It might not be a big deal at all. I’ve also discussed how trying to write can ruin an easy-to-please reader. If you read this and think it is much ado about nothing, then ignore it and go buy an enjoyable book. Don’t forget that I liked the book overall and recommend it. The POV issue was something that had come up during the tour, and this is my extremely long-winded response to it (best value for 2 cents ever).
I have one more little tidbit about Legend of the Firefish, but it will come a little later. Enjoy the rest of the blog tour!
by Jason Joyner | Aug 22, 2007 | Blog, CSFF, fantasy, fiction, reading, writing craft
Yesterday I tried to leave my post on the CSFF Blog Tour book Legend of the Firefish by George Bryan Polivka as a cliffhanger to pique interest. I discussed the strengths that I saw in the book and what made it an enjoyable read. Today I’m going to touch three points that dragged the book down for me a little that kept it from being one of my top books of the year (so far).
The first and second points are interrelated. As I mentioned yesterday, the book’s two major characters are unapologetically Christian, and they live consistently in this and it fits the story well. However, some of the story suffers slightly because of one of the character’s reliance on God’s sovereignty and will. This is tricky to discuss, because I believe in the message the author is saying behind it. The problem is that it sometimes hinders the action of the protaganist as he stops and contemplates what he does. There are several instances where Packer wrestles with High Ideals – nothing wrong with that. The trick is when he does it with chaos raging around him. I might use this aspect once or twice, but it happens a few times and slows down several action sequences.
Also, the use of this plot point somtimes stops Packer from acting, since “all is God’s will and he is leaving it in His hands”. It has some important consequences at the end, but again it happens enough that it bumps the flow of the story and the believability of the scene.
These two points aren’t terribly significant, but they were “hiccups” in the story for me. The final point is significant, but is also an interesting point of topic.
A little background: an author has to chose a point-of-view (POV) when writing. Typically the author picks either first or third-person. First person usually sticks with one character throughout the book. Third person can stay with one person, or move around to different characters. However, usually a change of character POV happens at a chapter or a definite point in a chapter.
Polivka just doesn’t “break” this rule, he demolishes it. He takes an omniscient viewpoint, meaning he switches POV whenever he wants, sometimes from paragraph to paragraph.
For me, I did not enjoy this. It has the effect of confusing who is doing the talking/thinking – especially when Packer is with guys or Panna with any ladies. It comes across as “head-hopping.” It really took me a while to get the hang of it, so I read the first part of the book slowly, not really getting into it until later on.
Now, when I approached the tour I knew I would blog about this, but I was just going to chalk it up to something Polivka would have to work on. However, over the last week I’ve read a few things that gave me a different slant on it.
1. From Mike Duran at Decompose:
From Day 1: When one lives under the notion that success means strict adherence to a set of rules — as this published author clearly implies — a type of literary legalism follows. Am I suggesting there aren’t things that tighten a story, make it more readable, more cohesive? Heck no. What I’m wondering is if this idea of “rules” is over-emphasized to new authors. The result is — as it was for me — that a lot of new authors live under the burden of legalism…
From Day 3: The writing rules have their place, but they can also blind one to the destination. After all, the ultimate goal of the storyteller is not to obey all the rules, but to get her readers safely across the street.
2. Then there was Becky Miller’s interview with Nick Harrison, Polivka’s editor from Harvest House:
Bryan’s ability to handle the point of view shifts necessary to pull off this feat [using so many POV’s] is awesome—and unique. Not many authors handle point of view as well as Bryan does. I consider Bryan’s use of point of view a huge asset to the book—even though I know that all the writing books warn against such shifts. I think they do this because few authors can handle those shifts well. Bryan is a master at it, in my opinion.
3. Finally, there’s Bryan Polivka’s own comments in an interview with Valerie Comer:
As for the omniscient point of view, I find that other writers and publishers are very interested in that whole discussion, but I’ve never yet had a pure reader (who is not also a writer) even ask me about it. It seems odd to me that this should be out of style, or out of favor, particularly in a world where movies and television are having great success with omniscience. Lost, Friends, Rent, Oceans Eleven, even Survivor and Real World–I would argue that any ensemble-cast product gets its appeal from going deep into multiple points of view. Fiction writers are, I think, well behind the times in that regard if they hew to a single viewpoint thinking it is somehow better for the audience. I may not have done it well, but I hope that doesn’t put anyone off the approach itself.
And the Christian viewpoint factors in here also. Historically, I believe the omniscient viewpoint went out of favor as secular existentialism took over the mainstream, based on a philosophy that we really can’t know anything outside our own single point of reference. And I think that’s just incorrect. The reason we have imagination, I believe, is for the apprehension of the infinite. God gave His creation this gift that we might know Him. And if we can know God, surely we can know others.
Now, armed with all of this information and opinion, I made an adjustment to my opinion. The thing that especially struck me was Bryan’s contention that basically he’s using an older style and we’re conditioned to accept a status quo that this “shouldn’t be done”. Especially with the discussion Mike Duran has been having at his blog.
I’ve argued before that authors need the freedom to create as they feel called and are inspired. I applaud Polivka for making a challenging artistic stand and sticking with it. Since it was intentional, I can’t fault it.
Nick Harrison thought that Bryan pulled this off well. There I might disagree some. I’ve seen other books that switch through a lot of POV’s and I didn’t get lost. My favorite book of the year so far, Abiding Darkness by John Aubrey Anderson, has some occasional POV hops and doesn’t suffer from it. Interestingly enough, I would say that Anderson’s hops were likely more accidental, while Polivka’s were intentional, and that it is apparent in reading. Again, it didn’t work for me 100%.
SO…is this a big deal? It might not be a big deal at all. I’ve also discussed how trying to write can ruin an easy-to-please reader. If you read this and think it is much ado about nothing, then ignore it and go buy an enjoyable book. Don’t forget that I liked the book overall and recommend it. The POV issue was something that had come up during the tour, and this is my extremely long-winded response to it (best value for 2 cents ever).
I have one more little tidbit about Legend of the Firefish, but it will come a little later. Enjoy the rest of the blog tour!
by Jason Joyner | Aug 21, 2007 | Blog, CSFF, fiction, reading, reviews, writing craft
Again, this month’s CSFF blog tour is for Legend of the Firefish. If you are looking for a unique book in Christian fiction, if you are looking for a adventurous tale to end the summer with, or if you are wondering whether to name your next child Jack Sparrow (the last one I hope is a little too out there…), then this is a book you should check out.
George Bryan Polivka has begun an ambitious and admirable tale with The Trophy Chase Trilogy, of which LotF is the first book. He has several strengths as a writer which made the book quite enjoyable.
The first thing I noticed about the book is the great description that he uses. He has a way with words that sets the atmosphere and tone for the situations in the book. Whether it is a poor village tavern, a ship fighting a gale, or a character wrestling with heart issues, Polivka has a gift for word craft and painting a visual picture with the language he chooses.
The mythology of the story’s world is strong as well. He skillfully builds the setting of sea craft. His characterization of the titular Firefish is a masterful touch, making the wily prey more than just a prize for a fisherman’s net. I really enjoyed these sections in the book.
The heroes of the story, Packer and Panna, have faith yet are flawed. They do not have all the answers, and they end up in some desperate situations. Their faith does not come across as a tack-on just for the CBA, but it is a real part of their character, and their responses are mostly very much in line with this.
The antagonist Talon is a delicious literary creation. Her palpable evil makes her a very strong opponent, one that seems impossible for the heroes to overcome. This always makes for a good obstacle for the protagonists, but there is a depth to her that is revealed throughout the story that makes her character all the richer. The pirate captain Scat Wilkins is also a very well thought out character in the story. He doesn’t become one dimensional (like Cap’n Sparrow in the last 2 Pirates movies), but confounds the reader through the book.
One final thought is that this is a very strong Christian novel. In that I mean that God and faith features very prominently. A lot of the conflict is internal conflict of God vs. man – trying to live to the ideals of a faith and not always succeeding. It seems that the world of Christian fiction is shifting. It used to be a critique that Christian fiction was “preachy,” and that this stigma kept people from enjoying these novels. I’ve noticed a backlash, in that books have been published lately without a lot of overt mention of God or the type of spiritual wrestling that is shown in Firefish. This is not necessarily a bad thing. The last CSFF book, Fearless, has no overt Christianity, and the author Robin Parrish admits that he is not writing to the standard CBA reader and has different goals with his writing. Polivka obviously has his own goals, and I applaud him. He does not hold back – he writes it as he sees it and I think it is in service to the story, not tacked on as preaching (for the most part). I was encouraged by his bold declarations of faith, and found it totally appropriate for this story.
Again, my opinion is that this is an enjoyable read, an unique book in the CBA currently, and well worth the time and investment. Yet there were a couple of things in the book that I wrestled with, and I want to discuss tomorrow. These issues play into some writing blog conversations from the last week, so come back tomorrow and I’ll tie these together and we can work out together whether these “weaknesses” of LotF really are such.
Trish Anderson Brandon Barr Wayne Thomas Batson Jim Black Justin Boyer Grace Bridges Amy Browning Jackie Castle Valerie Comer Karri Compton Frank Creed Lisa Cromwell CSFF Blog Tour Gene Curtis D. G. D. Davidson Merrie Destefano Jeff Draper April Erwin Beth Goddard Marcus Goodyear Russell Griffith Jill Hart Katie Hart Sherrie Hibbs Christopher Hopper Kait Karen Dawn King Tina Kulesa Lost Genre Guild Terri Main Rachel Marks Karen McSpadden Rebecca LuElla Miller Eve Nielsen John W. Otte John Ottinger Lyn Perry Deena Peterson Rachelle Cheryl Russel Hanna Sandvig Chawna Schroeder Mirtika Schultz James Somers Steve Trower Speculative Faith Jason Waguespac Daniel I. Weaver
Crimson Eve is part of a series, yet it is easy to read it on its own without having read the prior books, Violet Dawn and Coral Moon. Brandilyn is known for Seatbelt Suspense™, and this book does not disappoint. She is a master at taking plot twists and spinning the reader around until they have no idea what to expect. Crimson Eve starts in the first chapter by grabbing a hold, and the book doesn’t let up until the final chapter – really! There are surprises through to the very end.