You really like using 2nd person in your (published) fiction, and present tense. Is that a big preference or just how it shook out with the short fiction?
What a fun question!
Honestly, it's a little of both. My friend Valerie Valdes has a great essay about why second person sometimes appeals to marginalized authors - essentially, it feels less alienating because we're very used to being asked to step into an experience very different to our own (since so much fiction is anchored on the 'universal' straight-white-cis perspective). For myself, I started out in poetry, where writing to 'you' feels very natural, so, particularly with flash fiction, I drift back into that mode easily.
Second person is great for simultaneously inducing empathy while also distancing the character from what's happening, in an odd way. It's the epitome of 'tell don't show.' In third person, we can do a little bit of informing-on-emotional-state - at least in close third - but we also give the reader context to make their own judgment on whether the character really is feeling the way they're telling us they are, and whether that feeling is justified. In second person, we can get very sparse. A character might only give us one angle or detail of their experience, or a character might refuse to tell us anything at all about how they're feeling, practically dissociating (like the betrayed god-monster of Birds Are Trying To Reinvent Your Heart, a story which displaces emotions onto physical objects rather than placing them on 'you'-the-reader). A really good author - Rebecca Roanhorse's Hugo- and Nebula-winning Welcome to Your Authentic Indian Experience springs to mind - can use second person to incept emotions into the reader, using the complicity of the PoV to get far deeper under the skin than first - conversational, confessional - or third - documentary, informative - ever can.
The trick is, second person is a lot harder to maintain suspension of disbelief. Audiences are far more likely to reject a PoV - like an organ transplant - that asks them to mutate their own self-identity for the length of a story. It's very doable in small slices. Start going for longer, you are likely to lose people.
So that comes back to the difference between what I write and what I manage to sell đ I tend to write second-person in pieces under 2,000 words - Sparsely Populated, Birds, and (arguably second, but reads like first) Upon What Soil are all under 1,000, and I have a second-person lesbian forest-witch necromancy story coming out in Haven Spec next month that's ~1,700. And I've had a lot more success selling my flash fiction and poetry than I have my longer pieces. Of the ones I have sold, both my Silk & Steel story (6900 words) and my pirate feather-witches story in Skies of Wonder (4200 words) were third-person past, as are all three of the novels I've gone out on submission with. But alas! If no one buys them, or if only anthology markets which don't post online do, then no one can read them.
...having said all this, I am currently plotting out a second-person detective noir novella, but I'm 90% certain my agent will make me rewrite it into first when I'm done, so there's that đ
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
History for Granted, or When a Marginal Voice Tackles The Main Text
My thoughts about being a marginalised creator who chose to make a graphic novel on a historical figure in the dominant Western canon. About why I didn't choose a lesser-known history instead. About why, either way, it is not a loss to POC representation
Reposted from my official blog, where I keep all my long-form thoughts.
Some of you may know I write historical fiction. Some of you may also know Iâve been chipping away on an Alexander the Great graphic novel.
My role as a historical graphic novelist has been stewing in the back of my mind for a while now. Actually, the stewing began when I first thought of The Carpet Merchant of Konstantiniyya, but I already know my insights from that project. Be actively thoughtful. Be self aware of how your own biases and societal context influence your storytelling. Recognise the people before and around you. Use your power to bring up voices. Understand that the work of being a responsible author lasts beyond the final page of your story.
Such is the case for Alexander, The Servant and The Water of Life. What I have learnt from TCM still carries over, thank goodness.
However, since last November, I realised that Alexander is a different kettle of fish. I already knew this early on: the mindboggling breadth and scope of research material, the baggage carried by the subject, and the newness of everything. While TCM focused on a narrow historical context (Ottoman era Istanbulite migrates to Georgian era England), and had the advantage of me knowing the lead character for years prior (Zeynel, my precious nerd sonâŚ), Alexander was from scratch. I didnât know just how many Alexander Romances I really needed to read. I didnât know much about ancient Greek anything. I didnât know an atom about Alexander the Great himself â really, it was zilch.
Which means my responsibilities this time have a somewhat different character. A different edge.
I donât write historical fiction about royalties or the elite. The most I have ever been interested in is a well-to-do merchant. Even then, my merchant would have an uncommon edge; he is with the common people. Thatâs where my interests lie: in the common people. The ordinary people outside of the court who go about their daily ordinary lives and daily ordinary struggles. The ups and downs and ins and outs of aristocrats and royals donât excite me as much.
Then why Alexander? Honestly, heâs an exception.
Not because heâs suddenly a royal that interests me. Seriously, no royal will ever interest me enough to make a GN out of their life, based on their biography alone. (Though King James of the King James Bible and the secret tunnel to his boyfriend make a convincing petition) Alexander came to me in a roundabout way. A trick. He fooled me to exception by showing me his resume: Macedonian king, prophecised Egyptian pharoah, Persian king, son of a god, Jewish convert, Christian hero, Muslim prophet. And he showed me how many different cultures have absorbed him into their folk mythology over 2000 years. Even as the world changed and his body laid somewhere in Egypt, his shade travelled the world. Heâs the only secular figure with similar cultural-legendary reach as Jesus. King Arthur canât claim that. Heck, even Odysseus canât claim that. Oh, how could I have resisted? This is exactly what I am all about.
This is all Alexander by the way.
The common peopleâs Alexander.
The story of how different places have appropriated and localised him over time. Gave him different faces. Gave him slightly different names. Gave him quests and adventures and stories that had absolutely nothing to do with ancient Greece. Made him the believer of a pantheon into a believer of a singular God.
What brought me here is this literal embodiment of world literature. But heâs not an epic. Heâs popular legend. And he doesnât belong to any one culture or time or place. Heâs everywhere.
But like I said, this kettle of fish is different.
Alexander the Great is not exactly the most obscure of histories. Heâs a military idol. A national figurehead. He was a man. He was from ancient Greece. Heâs claimed as a âheritage of the Western (read: white) worldâ, an excuse for why conquest is the legacy of the white, Western man. This is Alexanderâs baggage, as I call it.
As a woman of colour (WOC) author from the global south, Iâm aware of my (small, individual amount of) power to bring up unheard of histories. Unseen biographies of little known people. A glimpse into outside cultures and voices that Western-dominated media and education gloss over like wallpaper. I could have written about Puteri Gunung Ledang, or May 13th 1969, or the history of how my family came to Malaysia sometime during the Xinhai Revolution. I have no obligation to write about Alexander, because until last November, he was seriously a cultural nobody to me. I have no stake in the furthering the hegemony of Western history.
And I think, maybe not owning that stake is why itâs necessary.
Just as important as minorities writing about little known histories, minorities should write about the histories that are taken for granted. Because of our unique experiences with the consequences of colonialism, slavery, violence, discrimination, dehumanisation, etc, we look at history differently. Itâs not about who wins or who loses. Itâs about who is missing, who is harmed, what is lostâŚthe gaps made by what was edited out.
With those glasses on, history taken for granted â if not already thoroughly given a critical cleansing â is shown to be what it really is: a history that isnât as well-known as we thought. (and thatâs okay)
I wonât be alone in saying I had no clue Alexander belonged to nobody and everybody (because everyone in the old world has an Alexander). For a long time, Western white history was gatekept, using the reasoning that whatever they claimed had an easy connect-the-dots relationship to their present day (even though I always knew that claim was oversimplified, anti-intellectual thinking). But, all of these things are simply whitewashed facades. The truth is that, like Greco-Roman everything, like Norse history, like Christian destiny, they are more complex, more diverse, more ambiguous, than what these facades can contain.
Just working with Alexander through the framework of the Alexander Romance already blows up general misconceptions about history: that history was a bubble, homogenous and separated from each other (âEgyptian historyâ âChinese historyâ âRoman historyâ, âChristian worldâ, âMuslim worldâ âEastâ, âWestâ), rarely interacting and influencing.
And looking at Alexanderâs actual biography says a lot about how open the world already was in his time. He was king of three empires. His pre-Hellenistic world was multicultural and diverse. It wasnât all white marble statues. It was, like what reality is, painted technicolour marble statues.
The Victorian era archeologists who whitewashed those statues stripped off more than just the colour. They took off knowledge.
After a lot of thinking, I feel like Iâm in a good place to make a GN about Alexander and the Alexander Romance.
Itâs not a confidence thing, though tbh, I believe that as a WOC creator from the global south I cannot afford to doubt myself. Itâs more about the position I am in and the new perspective I can offer about a historical-legendary figure taken for granted. And thereâs my endless well of passion for multicolour histories. Alongside my desire to decolonialise everything.
Itâs not a loss that I have chosen to work on a history taken for granted. Historical GNs are still dominated by the white Western cis-male perspective, both in subject and authorship. To be clear, I wouldnât consider that particular perspective wrong or lesser on its own. My only qualm is when that perspective becomes the majority perspective, or worst the only perspective, which is given to an audience. I always think about this TED Talk by Chimamanda Adichie, about the Danger of a Single Story:
Me being here, telling an entirely different story, is a statement by itself.
Even then, I shouldnât need to justify my choice. Whether itâs to a person who tells me I shouldnât pursue Alexander because heâs a part of the dominant narrative, or to another person who tells me that as a minority creator I must adhere to my social responsibility (responsibility demanded by whom?) to tell little known histories or stories. Again, in my case, I think itâs not a loss which way I go, Alexander or not, because whatever I write is going to be a different story.
I think the only loss is when there arenât still yet more marginalised authors to take on both the little known histories and histories taken for granted. The project of diversifying storytelling is not demanding the few marginalised voices to choose the correct, exotic, culturally-representative dish they had to bring to the potluck, but making the table wider, inviting more voices, so that, by authorâs choice, any dish can be present and enjoyed by everyone.
My choice in whatever story I desire to write, as long as it doesnât bring harm and intolerance and it undergoes the necessary self-interrogation, should be a choice that is already given. If white, Western authors can have this freedom, why not everyone else? Why must minority voices be defaulted to never having this good faith at the start?
Is it not enough that we already suffer from a lack of representation and a lack of self-esteem? Must our hands be tied even tighter, to be told that even our own voice cannot be trusted, because that trust has been abused over and over by the dominant voice?
Every new voice that is encouraged to speak is one more step towards making the table bigger.
This is one of my responsibilities of being a (historical) graphic novelist. I am here to encourage, and to make the table bigger. I am here to say, oh look, this particular history is exciting too, see how weird and creative and large the world already was.
And for Alexander GN in particular, itâs about showing that we have shared a historical-literary figure. That Alexander (and his baggage) isnât immune to criticism. That by bringing him back the way Iâm planning to, Iâm no longer just talking about Alexander of Macedon. I am talking about Sikandar. I am talking about Alisaunder. I am talking about the Alexander conceptualised by Nizami, by Arrian, by Joseph Flavius, by every hand who has ever written and drew their own Alexander.*
Already, is that not a hundred different stories?
* despite the fact all of these voices were maleâŚwell thatâs gonna change
There will be time for me to write of lesser-known histories, if I feel the calling. Maybe I wonât ever. (I did tell myself The Carpet Merchant was the last historical GN Iâll ever do in foreverâŚhere I am. Nothing is predicted.) And if Iâm not compelled, again, that is not a loss.
While my Elphie doll is going to be exclusively in her long black dress (see defying gravity onwards), I am indecisive as hell about what colour the Glinda doll should be wearing (do not let the movie fool you, the girl's wardrobe includes more than just pink) (r.i.p. her yellow one short day outfit) so I am going to attempt (ATTEMPT) to make interchangeable pink and blue dresses for her. The pink dress vaguely based on her ozdust dress and the blue one based on her bubble dress.
How many warnings should be included in a crochet trivets or hot pads to not use to carry hot pots only place them on a flat surface to protect it from the surface.
(The gaps in the yarn can become wide enough to allow you to touch the pot or pan and get hurt.)
I'm feeling like I would do sets, match the hot pads with pot holders that ARE meant for it. I mean, I'm planning to do this in conjuction with towels that are like the picture. Just do the crochet stuff with the yarn and (eventually) use sublimation to match the towels with the pot holders and oven mits for a fully coordinating kitchen.
(My real hesitation are dish cloths because I haven't tried that scrubby yarn yet. I could see maybe matching the towels, as well as doing some sublimated towels without the crochet for other uses.)
Basically a work in progress.
But also, I have some striped blankets I'm about to list on Etsy, and I would sublimated coasters to match the pattern. Pillows are a hand wavy thing. I get matching to the pattern, but also, a bunch of solid ones to match could also work. Depends on your throw pillow game, I guess.
*the towel is NOT mine, I borrowed from Google, but the blanket is. To be $75 on Etsy when listed because of the full on headache sourcing $50 of yarn was.
Wanting to create art but not having the skill or motivation to learn how to do it. Wanting to see a piece of art, only to soon realize it doesn't exist, and you can't make it. Wanting something to exist, but not being able to make it simply appear, realizing you're going to have to work hard to see if you can make your vision come to life. And you'll probably fail, you almost definitely won't be able to recreate the idea you've cooked up in your head, but no one else is going to do it, so either you learn and you try or you just don't get the thing.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming