Working this morning.

 

When writing a book, one has to be many things besides just the creative writer. Creating is one aspect of writing a novel. At some point, one has to become a stern reader, an experienced editor, a capable book doctor, meaning rewrites if necessary. One has to be able to look at the work and know what its weaknesses are and if the book can sustain those weaknesses or not. For example The Night Circus, it's exquisite at many points, but it does have a weakness, drama and plot, especially toward the ending. However, that was a weakness the book in totality could carry, and the reader does not care. Atmosphere held it up, it's own enchantment. But certain readers do feel that weight, the ambiguity, especially when concerning Celia and Marco. How working writers learn how to examine this is: They simply take the magic away from The Night Circus and then look at it without the exquisite language and atmosphere. This is what editors do. This is what book doctors learn. This is what very stern readers can see. This is one of my favorite books and I can see this with no judgment as a beloved reader. But as a writer, I have to know it. I have to know it, because I love this book intensely and I admire the atmosphere, and I want to learn those skills, but I also want a plot. Can a book like this hold both? Is it necessary? If one chooses plot and drama, does one forfeit atmosphere? Hmm. Questions for this morning.