The SO WHAT factor

[Angela Zeman]

When we all write whatever it is we write, does anyone ever pause and consider whether our novel/short story/flash fiction is interesting (or whatever) enough to justify our effort and/or its existence?

Sometimes I read something I write, or that someone else wrote, and the words 'so what?' just rise out of my soul. And then I drop it in the trash (or delete it).

What does anyone here think gets a fiction story past 'so what'?

[Pepper Smith]

Oh, that does happen to me. Best thing to do is put it away for a while, because it's usually a sign of mental fatigue, at least for me. Coming back at it when my mind is rested usually makes it easier to see if it's really that bad, or if it was just a quirk of the moment that made me think it was.

[I. J. Parker]

There is no knowing what is interesting to other people. I'm forever tossing books that others love.

[Adam Bourgoin]

When I get to this point while writing, I usually take a few nights off. It clears my mind and gets me excited for it again the next time I open it.

[minervaK]

I feel this way a lot while I'm deep in the work, but usually, if I forge ahead, when I go back and read it later I realize that I was subconsciously connecting to something that I'd forgotten existed. Like, I'll be writing along furiously on a scene and I'll put in a detail, spend some time on it, and think, 'What the hell am I doing that for?' When I go back and read thru the next day, I realize, 'Oh, I mentioned that in chapter one, so it has to go there, that's why.'

Thus have I learned (sometimes the hard way) not to permanently delete anything when in the throes of the 'so what' factor. In my case, it's often merely my inner Critic, trying to push her way in where she doesn't belong.

MK
www.minervakoenig.com

[Dana King]

It has to be relevant, at least to the story, at best to some greater point. This is why I don't read virtually no serial killer novels. The killer keeps on mowing people down, and the best result we can hope for is that he is caught, which he will be. The only real question is how high the body count gets. Attempts to make the killer target someone close to the investigator are almost always a transparent attempt to "raise the stakes," since the connection is always either tenuous or wholly fabricated to make that one plot point work. So you get to the end, the killer is caught or killed, and you think, "So what? What's different here from any of fifty other serial killer novels?"

I guess that's the other thing that's needed to pass the "So what?" test. There has to be a difference, even if it's just a clever new way to look at a story we've pretty much heard before.

[I. J. Parker]

Sounds good to me.

[Dana King]

"This is why I don't read virtually no serial killer novels"

And I wonder why I'm not published. I'm an idiot, that's why.

[minervaK]

LOL Dana -- I read it as a comical intentionality. You are most definitely not an idiot.

[Dennis Webster]

When I write something and read it back months later, I say, "Did I write that?" I wonder if that's where the muse comes in? Most of my stuff is just too damn weird. I used to belong to a writing group of ladies with unicorn rainbow poetry. I read aloud a section from a crime novel I was writing and a sweet old Indian woman looked at me and said, "Have you ever sought professional help?"

[Angela Zeman]

Oh, no! Lol! Don't you think crazy people write the best stories?