I mentioned yesterday that I just finshed reading a six book series. As I read I analyzed parts of it, but not too much. I was too busy enjoying the tale. Now that I’m done, snippets of observation are floating around in my head. Instead of a reader, I’ve become a writer, picking apart what did and didn’t work for the story.

I’m applying these thoughts to things I hear in critiques and I can tell you it’s a lot easier to do to someone else’s work. But since these stories have a couple of things in common with mine, it’s also a way to pick apart my own work.

So…

Good
First thing that drew me into the books. In an urban fantasy universe, the main female lead was not an ass-kicking, crime-fighting, tough as nails chick with an immortal chip on her shoulder. She worked at a book store. Okay, she still had the immortal chip (she’s a succubus after all). This gives us a strong female lead that doesn’t immediately fall into the stereotype of the genre, but without straying so far from it that it alienates fans of the genre.

Not-so Good
In a series, in each successive book you have to spend a little time with the “previously on…” This is something that’s always irritated me, way back when I read the ‘Sweet Valley High’ books. I get that for someone new to the series, they need that background, but for those of us who have read one or two books, or as in this case have read them all in the last couple of days, it gets tired. I don’t think there’s a solution for this. It’s probably just a personal pet peeve anyway, but it’s something I want to learn to work around in any of my series. Conveying that ‘what came before’ knowledge without boring paragraphs of info-dump.

Good
I enjoyed all of the male romantic potentials, especially the main romantic interest. Each of them was unique, personality-wise, though they all tended a little too much toward coddling the main character. But really, the main romantic lead was the character I kept reading for. The one person in the book I could really relate to and cheer for.

Not-so Good
This also ties back to the fact I didn’t really care much for the main character. She was too…I dunno…I just didn’t like her very much. I didn’t have a problem with her job for hell, or her morals, it was all true to the character. And honestly, the character was believable and well-written (to me anyway), she just wasn’t someone I liked or could relate to. I think this is a personal thing, but something any author has to be aware of. There were still characters to keep me invested in the whole thing, just not the main character.

Good
By halfway through book 3, I had the overall plot figured out. I knew how the series would end. You might think that’s bad, but the thing is, I kept reading anyway. I wanted to see the details. I wanted to feel the emtion. I wanted to live it through the author’s words anyway. That’s good story telling. I’d like to reach a point in my own writing where I can put an equal balance on twists and surprise combined with compelling writing.

Not-so Good
Book 5. Like the entire middle of the book. I’ve been hearing a lot recently that a main character needs to act, not be acted on, in order to move a story forward. Something that kept all the other stories moving was the main character acting. Book 5, was all about rescuing her. *yawn*. Even worse, it had weakly contrived plot elements to tell what was going on in places she couldn’t be, and at least 1/4 of the book was…more flashbacks and backstory. Pages and pages of variations on things we’d already read. Not just a couple of paragraphs.

Now that I have these overall elements, I’m starting to compare them to my work. There was more. How the author handled sticking multiple gods in the same universe, for instance. But that’s for a different post (maybe).

Do you ever use in-depth analysis of someone else’s writing to help you polish your own?