Friday, December 5, 2008

writing quandry

I'm taking a poll. I know, I know, I always ask you people for your opinion and then just do what I feel like anyway, but please don't let that dissuade you from offering it nevertheless.

Here's the background. I haven't written any original fiction since 2003/2004, though I did do a little revising after that. In the process of cleaning closets, I found a draft of my last half-written story with two more scenes than I knew I had. So, I read it and I liked it and I decided it's probably worth trying to finish. And lately I've been feeling like maybe I want to start writing again.

Here's the question. If I finish this story I either have to update all the 2003 references in it (the protagonist's kitten-heeled boots, the fact that the band plays "yet another Outkast song" at her wedding, the late supper at Sonsie, etc.) OR I have to make plain in the story that this is all happening circa 2002-2003. It's easy enough to fix the fashion references, the restaurants, the hit songs that are inescapable, but on the other hand, the protagonist's suitor/lover/husband is in--wait for it--commercial real estate (when I made that quip in here a couple months ago about commercial real estate being a cover for the mob, I *totally* forgot I ever had used it for a character) and I'm thinking, in the current economy that doesn't have the same meaning as it did in 2002/2003. See, Jeff has to be in an occupation that has made him *a lot* of money at a fairly young age, and an occupation that relies on smoothness, charm, and really nice suits, for the purposes of the story and characterization. Jeff cannot have made his money through geekery. And I'm thinking, those are the kind of people who would be very nervous in today's economy. Jeff cannot be nervous for my purposes; Jeff cannot have a moment of doubt.

So perhaps it's best to have this all taking place in the near-recent past rather than the present. Would it disturb you as a reader to read something that clearly happens almost-now but not now? Would you think "why the hell isn't this happening in 2009?"

Oh, and if anyone would like to be a beta reader, please let me know. I don't have anyone to do that for me anymore and it's always so useful.

xoxo

5 comments:

crispix67 said...

I would think it would be easier to just make it very clear it happens in 2002-03 than to try and update everything to present day.

Thats my vote.

malevolent andrea said...

Thanks! At the very beginning of the story, in setting up that the first scene takes place in January, the protagonist makes a faux promise to herself/resolution that she's getting off the caffeine and sugar. It would be *really* easy to throw in a sarcastic line about foreswearing all her vices in 2003, or something like that. (Which would actually work ironically in the story!)

Anonymous said...

Really good question. I'm of three minds about it, really (which is three more minds than I normally have):

My first reaction is you're better off setting it in the more distant past (1980's or so) so than any anachronisms with the present day aren't so jarring. One problem with setting a story in a very recent past (but not present) is that it's so close to the present, but not... which can be more jarring than just being set at an entirely different time.

However, if you can make a reference or two to 2003, maybe those anachronisms just won't feel so anachronistic, though you might want to ramp up the time-specific cultural references, so it's very obvious that it's intended to be from a different time (and as a side effect emphasize all the changes in the last six years).

Updating, of course, takes care of all the anachronism problems... except if we're heading into a depression, a lot of the references might rapidly change yet again before the story's finished or published. In which case it'll be anachronistic by the time anyone reads it anyway.

For that matter, even if you had published the story in 2003, it would be anachronistic now. I don't know that really makes a story any less enjoyable to read, so perhaps keeping it in the 2003 era (or putting it back to the booming '80s or something) is better than trying to bring it up-to-the-minute, cause that minute's always changing.

I think it would be great if you started writing again! I'd happily volunteer as a beta reader for this or any other stories. :-)

malevolent andrea said...

Well, there *is* that point that by the time this lil opus is finished, sent out, accepted, and then finally sees the light of day, it'll be 2011 or so. :-)Which, y'know, makes 2003 a whole nother decade, so the almost-but-not-quite-now is less of a problem.

And you're on. Expect email with reading material attached :-)

Uncle said...

I read enough in a day, thx, but I'm also voting for keeping it in its original period. You start updating, and that's where the creepy mistakes begin showing up. Your estimate of production time is spot on...not to mention the movie rights after that.