Rick Riordan's THE RED PYRAMID

I just finished reading Rick Riordan's THE RED PYRAMID. Loved it! I wondered what sets his stories apart from so many other writers. His style is very evident in the Percy Jackson stories, just like it is in the Kane Chronicles, but what makes it different?

IMO: the sign of an excellent writer who has developed his own style is evident in the voice the story is written in. I could pick up a Rick Riordan, Jayne Castle (aka Jayne Ann Krentz/Amanda Quick), Julia Quinn, or a Jim Butcher and I would recognize the writing without even seeing the name of the author. Their writing voices are very distinctive. And if a reader enjoys the writer's voice then they will tend to buy the writer's stories.

The first thing I noticed with both of these series is that the protagonist (Percy and Carter/Sadie) are telling the stories from a first person point-of-view. Now, I've been wandering around the romance circles for awhile and there are some very strong opinions about 1st POV, and most of them are negative.  Personally, I think 1st POV brings the reader closer to the story by immersing them into the character telling the story.  In other words, it opens the window separating the writer's story from the reader, allowing the reader to 'see' the story more clearly.

In these stories, there many layers. Oh, you have the main story for that particular book, but you also have the overriding story that connects all the books together. Which means they are stand alone books with a beginning, middle and end, BUT they also leave loose ends that need to be tied up in the subsequent story. This opens the door for the author to weave additional subplots through the story.

In both the Percy Jackson books and the Kane Chronicles, there are HUGE amounts of mythology woven into the story. Rick handled this with his usual aplomb since he had to have a certain amount of info dumping to bring the reader up to speed on the mythology of the story--in THE RED PYRAMID it was Egyptology. The way he handled these info dumps was appropriate for the age of the reader AND the sequence of the story, by having a god or goddess EXPLAIN things to either one of the main characters, simply because at their age they wouldn't know this information. The last part is a biggie IMO, because he doesn't tell more than the reader needs to know at that particular point in the story.

So, so many writers stumble with research. They want to explain everything to the reader at the beginning of the story, resulting in huge info dumps and backstory junk that just simply isn't necessary. Many times the research can be woven into the story by the character simply being in THAT environment or experiencing something first hand. The reader doesn't need the history behind something, they simply need to view it from the character's POV.

In both of these series, Rick has these main characters talking to the reader. In the world of "writing inside the box", this is a huge no-no. Rick doesn't write inside the box, he tends to color outside the lines, but he knows exactly what he is doing while he is doing it.

And it works!

And you know what?

I may never be in the same league as Rick Riordan, but I'm me. And I'm happy with my writing style and the stories that I write.

Later, Peeps!

Percy Jackson vs. The Ranger's Apprentice

Right before my ski vacation, I started re-reading the Percy Jackson (PJ) books by Rick Riordan.  I didn't plan to read them because I was right in the middle of another series, The Ranger's Apprentice (RA) by John Flanagan.  But what I found interesting was how the PJ books sucked me in and MADE me want to read them all over again.

Now this isn't to say that the RA books are not as good--they are--but it started me thinking about a writer's voice and style.

Riordan writes PJ in first person and he's an American, while Flanagan writes in third person and he's Australian.

You might not think their nationalities matter, but really it does BECAUSE this is the essence of who they are as people, how they are raised and taught.  In other words, who you are helps dictate your writing voice and style . . .  up to a point.

And in my opinion, Riordan's PJ books are the most engaging reads.  They are full of action, full of fun, huge amounts of dialogue, AND full of Greek Mythology that isn't rubbed in your face.  The things Riordan teaches the reader is so passive, and woven into the story, that the reader doesn't even realize he's learning anything.

This isn't to say that Flanagan's RA is bad, the books are just different.  He tends to write more narrative with detailed descriptions of various aspects of his story.  For example: archery.  Flanagan goes into great detail about the long bow, arrows, how to shoot, how to line up a shot, how to account for wind and distance, etc.  He doesn't do this in one lump info dump, but spreads it throughout the story. In other words, the reader KNOWS Flanagan is either a superior archer or he's very well read about the sport.

But as we all know, not every author is interesting to every person.  Stories that excite me, other readers might find boring.

The best we strive for is to write in OUR own style and voice.  Sometimes we hit it out of the park.  Sometimes we struggle.  But we ALWAYS strive to make our stories an entertaining escape.

Something to think about.
Later, Peeps!