Should I follow my instinct or public demand when writing a story?

Let's come at this from a different angle. There is a difference between the ending the reader wants and the ending that they find satisfying. An happy ending can be emotionally empty. A sad ending can be emotionally fulfilling. (There is a reason, a profound reason, why we listen to sad songs. They confirm our perception of the sadness of life, and therefore make our essential loneliness bearable.)

The problem with the death of Holmes was not that it killed a popular character, but that it did it in a way that was utterly untrue to the characters of both Holmes and Moriarty. It was an unsatisfying death. If Conan-Doyle had given him a satisfying death, a death that made emotional sense, there would have been national mourning, but not national outrage.

So, give your character an ending that is true. Happy or sad does not matter. What matters is the emotional completeness of the ending. We can weep for joy or for sorrow with equal depth of feeling, but a trivial ending, whether happy or sad, gives no satisfaction.

posted about 8 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

Mark Baker‭

4371 reputation 12 1104 744 58

Well I would say that you should make people want to read the book.Normally I would say follow your instinct but if that would make people not want to read it then I say listen to the public. ;)

posted almost 8 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

Rebel geek‭

10 reputation 0 1 2 0

There are those that claim that bestsellers cannot be made. They advise you to write the story that feels most relevant to yourself, because otherwise your writing will feel void and empty.

Then there are all the professional authors and editors, whose daily work it is to make bestellers. They manage to understand the desires of their target audience and turn a mediocre manuscript into a bestselling book.

The first is called art. Sometimes it results in fantastic mega-blockbuster success. But most often it is appreciated only by your friends (if you have any). The second is called all kind of names, and it often does not reach the New York Times bestseller list, but it consistently makes its authors enough money to lead a comfortable life, and their fans love them well.

What path you choose, is up to you.

I take a middle path: I do consider what readers want (see Genre conventions: Which end do readers expect?) and attempt to reconcile that with how I feel about the end myself. You need to be creative about how you find a solution that satisfies both you and your audience, but to me that kind of problem is what makes writing fun.

A vision without a focus is just rambling. It is your attempt to communicate with your readers that gives your writing that focus.

posted about 8 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

System‭

3226 reputation 147 215 553 0

I would probably act as Doyle did.
1) Certain of my popularity as an author, I would kill the character and hope people started reading my other books. 2) Gradually become frustrated. 3) Eventually write another Holmes story, possibly while grumbling.

Oh, to have such a problem.

posted about 8 years ago

CC BY-SA 3.0

caiguise‭

5 reputation 0 1 1 0

I think this is a false dichotomy.

To be sure, there are many reasons to write. You may be writing only for your own amusement or catharsis, in which case merely getting your thoughts down on paper will suffice and you will have no need to consider anybody else.

And to be sure, you can write purely for the market. If the only goal is to make money by writing, and you don't have anything you are burning to say to the world, you can write formula fiction for companies like Harlequin or Disney. Don't kid yourself that this is easy. The formulas are exacting, the competition is fierce, and the pay rate as low. But if that is what you want, you can do it.

But if you want to write because you have something to say, then you have to think about both your message and your audience. Communication is about finding a way to deliver your message in a way that the other person is willing to receive and able to understand.

If you aim is to say the thing that burns in you to be expressed, then you have to follow your own ideas, but you also have to think about the audience. It is about how to make your ideas palatable to the audience you want to reach.

No one is obliged to listen to you. To gain a hearing, you have to meet your audience's needs before your own. But to get you message heard, you also have to stay true to the thing you want to say. So it really is not one thing or the other; it's both.

posted about 8 years ago

CC BY-SA 4.0

Mark Baker‭

4371 reputation 12 1104 744 58