SRD says that "the ideal balance in a book is that absolutely everything is aimed like a laser at the climax of the book."You have said that when you're writing it's like you are working to a particular goal, do you ever take short cuts?
SRD: No. Why not just sit down one day, write out the ending in two sentences and spare yourself telling the story at all? Because you would lose the experience, and it is the experience that makes the ending make sense, gives it power and emotional resonance, makes it worth it. You need interaction between the process and the goal, and it wouldn't be worth writing or reading if that process were short-circuited in some way. Other writers are different: they have something different to offer. I have many friends who start at page one and discover the story. This is an enjoyable book to read, but it never focuses the way I want my stories to focus: even the best of the writers I know who work this way have other virtues to offer but they don't offer that. I aspire to it. The ideal balance in a book is that absolutely everything is aimed like a laser at the climax of the book. Despite the length of my work, I think of myself as being a very tight writer; there is actually nothing extraneous there. It may take up narrative space but it is not extraneous. That's because I am striving always to make sure that whatever I do is leading us there. I use the analogy of architecture: the structure I am building needs justifying in that particular way: any lintel or cornice or joist or roofing slate that doesn't fit that purpose must be disposed of, which is one reason we got rid of Gilden-Fire. It violated the whole narrative integrity and it wasn't necessary. It added a dimension which if it were necessary it would have been good to have it in: I really like Lord Hyrim, though Lord Shetra was a pretty nice character too and I'm always interested in the Bloodguard. It would have been nice to have that material in. But ultimately it was secondary: it was worth sacrificing in order to achieve the kind of focus I wanted the story to have.
- from an interview done in October 1991, just after the UK publication of Forbidden Knowledge.
This raises three questions in my mind:
1) Does SRD accomplish that in his writings (not just TCTC, but The Gap Series and Mordant's Need as well, not to mention The Man Who... Mysteries)?
2) Is this true of the best books that you have read? (For instance, is this true of LOTR?)
3) Are there good, even great, books that do not necessarily meet this criterion?