I am, understandably, obsessed with tales of second novelhood, like this one in Slate. (Thanks to Katherine Taylor, who bested me!)
My first novel had gotten good reviews and sold, for a first novel, reasonably well; I wanted to do better this time. At the very least, I wanted not to go backward. This novel's success would also impact my next book deal—hell, it might determine whether there would be a next one. And then there was Deborah. She works as a high-level editor at a major magazine; I didn't want to put her in the position of walking into the office the wife of second-rate novelist. The prospect of embarrassing her—of being anything less than a husband she might feel the urge to brag about—was even worse than the prospect of embarrassing myself.
The unfortunate use of impact as a verb notwithstanding, it's worth a read.
So, Mark, how does this piece impact your approach to your next novel?
Posted by: Konstantin | May 11, 2011 at 12:23 AM
From east of the Atlantic, I'd add 'gotten'.
Posted by: Andrew | May 12, 2011 at 05:04 AM
ps and 'backward'.
Posted by: Andrew | May 12, 2011 at 05:04 AM
What's the problem with "impact" as a verb? I don't get it? Webster's has a half dozen definitions for "impact" as a verb; seems kosher to me....
Posted by: Turbo Ferbo | May 12, 2011 at 01:08 PM
Deborah's "I loved being your wife tonight," at that reading where he thought the audience liked his short story is pretty sad. Having a wife whose devotion is that conditional, I mean.
Posted by: ward | May 14, 2011 at 06:23 PM
Yeah impact is also a verb. Nothing wrong with that sentence. TEV, can you explain?
Posted by: Ed Bast | May 15, 2011 at 07:14 AM
Ward, I totally agree with you. I wouldn't bet the farm on the longeivity of that relationship. It felt unbearably chilly.
OK. Impact. Yes, the dictionary allows the use of impact as a verb. But the dictionary also allows alright as one word, which people of a certain age still find hideous. I have no issue with impacted being use to describe, say, wisdom teeth - i.e., pressed up firmly against. But to use it in the transitive sense of having an effect on something is the ugliest kind of corporate sales jargon speak. It's fine, I suppose, at a board meeting but it has no place among people who care about words.
But like I said, I'm a certain age, and all.
Posted by: TEV | May 16, 2011 at 10:30 AM
If you've had one novel published, then you've won the game for all time.
A second one is just frosting.
Posted by: Shelley | May 17, 2011 at 09:28 AM
I agree about the use of 'impact' as a verb - it is similar to using 'ask' as a noun. In Australian Rules football, the word 'goal' is frequently used as a verb as well - as in 'he goals!' It sets my (non-impacted) teeth on edge.
Posted by: melbournegirl | May 18, 2011 at 04:54 PM
I felt a lot of pressure writing my second novel (just finished!). The first one was easy - I never really thought it would be published, so was able to write with freedom. With the second, I had an audience in my mind all the time, and I don't think that's a good thing. Still, it turned out better in the end (in my opinion) - but it needed a lot more work to get it to that point.
By the way "impact" as a verb sounds fine to me if you're a sales manager delivering a Powerpoint presentation, but not if you're a novelist writing about your latest book. I suppose the English language has always changed, but I think it says a lot about us that our language is being shaped not by writers and philosophers but by corporate jargon.
Posted by: Andrew Blackman | May 26, 2011 at 02:47 PM