I’ve concluded Rusalka is going to have to have a new copyright. I’m changing things. This is a book I always felt could have been better. I was writing it during some very hard years, when I was close to losing both parents: my dad and my mom were alternating in hospital, and it was just a very, very hard period during which my concentration wasn’t what it should have been. So I’m cleaning up the text, explaining some motivations, doing what I would have done if I’d had my wits about me.
One thing about writing: it gets input from the writer’s life, and not always of the best kind. I’m pretty sure I’m going to find the same thing with Chernevog and Yvgenie as well. They were all done at the same time. I can do better. You can say that of anything, but I’m very sure on this one.
I have not tried those three. I have been told they are very dark and . . . depressing. Perhaps they are, perhaps they aren’t. But, I think I may try your new and improved versions.
I hope by the time I get through with them they will be what I designed them to be: funny, as well as spooky.
There was always a sense of humor through those novels. Hmms, the writing was pretty dense but that isn’t the point. If you were used to your style/voice you kinda accepted that. I certainly didn’t find the depressing. Gut wrenching in places, oh yes, but not depressing.
I couldn’t say since I haven’t read them yet. Perhaps my source was also the source of depression?
I’m not sure exactly what I would call them. I know that I like them, but I also admit that they are the books that I am least clear on story-wise. If you asked me to boil the story down to its bare essentials, I don’t think that I could. I go through them basically on feel. I did always feel a little sad for Sasha, and wondered if the entire story was the result of a wish of his.
I did not find the Russian series depressing. I re-read them all early last year and enjoyed watching Sasha develop as a wizard and Pytre take on responsibility for others. I remember having some difficulty figuringout how the magic works, but Sasha was going through the same difficulty; I felt I was working it out along with him. All three books require careful reading and thinking; a lot of the action is mental. I was also interesting in how the wizard’s journals played a part in their use of their skills. I’ve gone in and out of journal keeping over the years and found Sasha’s careful notation of what he wished and what happened related to some of my thinking journal writing. and why I’ve done it for parts of my life.
I’ll be interested to see how all three are changed when you have them finished. And, for those who worry about no humor, just keep an eye out for Babi.
Lord, I’ve had people write to me and tell me Babi just scared the daylights out of them. I think of him as an ill-tempered little Scottie dog.
ok, ok. I have my copy of Rusalka in my hand. I open it up and I read on the title page “For Spence, Best wishes CJ Cherryh.” I think Sharon gave it to me and I had never been interested in reading it until now.
I’ll tell you in a day or two if I like it.
“… Sasha’s careful notation of what he wished and what happened …” now that is what i r r i t a t e s and depresses me. There was too much of it, I did not find the trilogy dark. Could not get further than Chapter 5 in Chernevog in my reread! Look forward to the version without (please) too much reflexion.
Well, Babi may be an ill-tempered little Scottie dog, but he’s a distinct personality, and his self-interested behaviors combined with his apparent responsibility for the residents of the wizards house make for a lot of fun throughout the books, at least for me. My comment and evenus17’s response just go to prove that people read your books for many reasons and start from many places. I’ll confess that Hellburner and Heavy Time were the hardest for me to read, and to keep track of what was happening. Some day I’ll give them another shot and see if I can bring a different view to them.
I have to admit to being in the (apparently) small minority that just don’t like the Cyteen books. It’s nothing that I can really put my finger on except that I just don’t click with any of the characters, down to the point that I think it was nearly criminal to try and recreate someone like Ari. And I have great moral problems with the entire idea of azi, especially seeing the logical conclusion one can take them to in Serpent’s Reach. I read the Cyteen books because I don’t think I would have a good idea of all the different sides of the Alliance/Union universe without them, but it’s more like homework than pleasure reading. To give a guideline, I think it took me 6 weeks to finish Regenesis. I finished the latest Bren book (and I have serious problems keeping one-word titles straight!) in a week.
The cyteen books are not my favorite either. I find the idea of Azi to be creepy at its mildest and immoral at its worst. I would not want to live int he Union at all. But the books are well written and the stories are interesting.
I far prefer the Chanur books, however.
CJ, if I have count (dubious), you’ve got four books now you’re planning major revision to: this trilogy and Faerie. Maybe that can of worms that was sealed a while ago needs re-opening? Without a consistent retitling template, how’s a reader to know whether she’s getting a new, related book or the author’s re-edit of a book she has?
As to “…too much reflexion.” That’s a point I’ve been pondering, reading Bren’s reflections in Foreigner and what’s-his-names in Hammerfall. It seems to me if you have a protagonist alone, especially a lonely protagonist, you’re stuck with reflection or a very detached omniscient point of view. I was also noticing this with Hornblower (isolated) and Aubrey/Maturin (not), and more of CJ’s works: Paladin, Chanur–both not. Having the protagonist not isolated also allows for more points to be made by actions not by words, which seems to make for a stronger character–at least a character I like more, myself.
I like the reflections in Foreigner. Gosh I love that book. I enjoy the whole series but the first book really nailed it for me and I have re-read it at different times in my life and felt the same way. Somehow it touches me and honestly I can not think of a thing I have in common with Bren so I doubt it is some similiar self-interest at work.
It does depend on the book and the characters… I agree that someone surrounded by others can make the “show not tell” aspect of the story stronger but I don’t really think it indicates a stronger character.
I think sometimes we connect with a character more than someone else might. I really love Bren’s character growth throughout the books as well…
On the other hand – and I am not going to name the author or book but I recently read a book (different genre and certainly not a “serious” book but I enjoy a lot of different types of books) and the main character was so self-centered that while action was happening in front of her, she was engaged in an internal dialog to the point where I said (out loud to my husband’s amusement) “STOP IT! Let me hear what they are saying!” (meaning the other characters)
To be honest, as annoying as it was, I think that it was the author’s intent so I guess it was successful even if I wanted to throw the book across the room (probably not the author’s intent).
Writingmom, are you familiar with this Dorothy Parker quote? “This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.”
Funny: I found Babi entirely recognizable. (Making a mythical being three-dimensional is a nifty thing to pull off, btw. Imaginary gardens with real toads in them is one thing; giving to airy nothing a local habitation and a name and footprints is another.) IIRC at the time we had a housemate with a dog, and cats of our own; maybe that had something to do with it.
Yeah, dark. I liked that, but then I like Richard Thompson too. And I’ve had a crush on Margaret Hamilton since I was five or so.
The thing about writing is that it’s often not the words, not the scene, but the setup or even the emphasis of a particular sentence in a setup that makes a thing work or not work. Frequently in an edit I can add or cut a few words and have a beta reader insist I’d put in whole paragraphs—because it shone a light on something hitherto obscured. If my editor points to one thing as a problem, I often fix something 30 pages removed from it, and satisfy the objection.
Re the other point, I will always state in the pre-purchase text whether a particular work is new or a re-edit. I want no possibility of someone being confused.
I am 3/4ths of the way through Rusalka. My life is very busy at the moment and this book is very dense. I have not found it to be depressing. It is dark and bewildering in places, however. I am enjoying it.
It is full of word salad and occasional unconnected threads that don’t go anywhere. But I am fixing that.
I wonder if the book’s eventual “buy me” pages should have links — assuming technical and time-constraint feasibility, of course! — to threads concerning them. I am hugely more interested in reading the new one, now that I’ve seen this thread! (And pondering whether I should try to venture into the Terrible Clutter of the library to dig out the original…)
That’s not a bad notion. I can do it, for one thing, via the tag cloud, and at least gather some of the better discussion into a series of links. Remind me of this when we get our store up and going.
OK, for the record, it took 4 days squeezed in my busy schedule to read Rusalka. It was a bit dark in places and the constant rain and snapping of twigs in the faces of Pyetr and Sasha, added to their utter helplessness in other places would be enough to make a person who was already depressed get worse.
I am surmising that is what happened to the person who told me this.
I did find the world they were traversing to be very dreary and no I would never want to live there. But the book was well written. I found the places that I was bewildered usually matched the main characters state of mind. And as they struggled to make sense of their world, I understood it more.
The book ended well and I wouldn’t mind having Misighi and Wiun as neighbors.
I am so happy to know Rusalka will be published again. I haven’t opportunity to read it, as I haven’t opportunity to read your older books, (only few which were translated into my language). I adore your books, especially Morgaine and Foreigner serie. I used to act as an interpreter few times and I’ve found in Bren a lot of my thoughts of an between-the-cultures interpreter’s situation. And of the impossibility of total interpersonal understanding
The Foreigner serie inspired me to begin reading books in English – first books were translated into my language and then it stopped.
And Rusalka – I am from Eastern Europe, rusalkas are from our legends. I am really curious what an western author may write about them
When I was writing Rusalka, the political map of Eastern Europe was changing fast—and I corresponded with some fan groups there, and traded copies of my books for, of all things, children’s books and fairy tales. I read just a very little Russian, and I wanted something simple, that would show me pictures of the forests and animals and plants. I found that the dictionaries made under the USSR didn’t even have the words for the old legendary creatures, or the old beliefs, so I had to use my meager knowledge of the language to guess at the plurals. I was very happy later to learn I had gotten them right. Some language classes even wrote to me saying they were using Rusalka to teach English.
So glad I can republish these books and get them to people who’d like to read them!