The Art of Appeal

When I wrote and published my first novel, "The Big Men," back in 2017, I had a few specific goals in mind for it. Mostly, they centered around the notions of challenging myself artistically, and completing the project to the best of my ability.

I knew from the onset that "The Big Men" would face an uphill battle in terms of finding its audience, not for any lack of quality or value as a novel, but by virtue of being an independently-published debut from an unknown author, featuring an unorthodox premise and literary style. In short, I did not expect much of "The Big Men" from a commercial standpoint beyond the relatively-modest goal of establishing myself as a "professional" novelist via its meager sales.

In retrospect, I still feel good about the way I handled the marketing of my first book: Keeping things rather low key and low impact, and letting the book find its audience at an organic, albeit somewhat glacial pace. I've always been a firm believer in the idea that some manifestations of creativity are more art than product and to me, "The Big Men," being one such example, warranted a more subtle approach.

Of course, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with a given work having an inherent, commercial appeal. Many might argue quite successfully that such efforts often represent the pinnacle of any medium, being simultaneously artistically and commercially viable.

Still, I've always had a soft spot for the sort of avant-garde, off-kilter manifestations of art that by their very nature, challenge the traditional standards of comfort and acceptance in those who experience them. As such, I can't help but be proud of what I accomplished in that regard with "The Big Men" as I feel it manifests those qualities in satisfying, compelling ways.

 As rewarding and personally fulfilling as the experience of writing "The Big Men" and bringing it to market was for me, I felt it was important to begin to show my range as a writer with my second novel, which led to me taking a very different approach, with a very different set of goals in mind, as I began work on "309."

For me, one of the more interesting takeaways I've gleaned from my experience is that there is in essence a different form of artistry in creating something of quality intended to be broadly appealing. When preparing to write "309," the cynical portion of my brain had repeatedly sparked a protest in my conscious mind suggesting that there was something invalid or unworthy about the premise of creating something with the specific intent of mass appeal. It was as if I'd been conditioned to view such an effort as less than artistic.

Ironically, this could not have proven to be further from the truth in my case. As it turned out, I found myself artistically challenged in a very different way by virtue of the constraints I'd willingly adopted. I have no doubt that such constraints are often used as an excuse for lazy, or half-hearted creative efforts in many circumstances but I was genuinely surprised to find just how much creativity and intellectually-satisfying output was required from me to ultimately craft something artistically valid, yet broadly accessible.

Having said that, I still often embrace and generally appreciate the value of a less constrained, more raw artistic expression but I feel I've also turned an important corner as a writer by challenging myself in a different way, without compromising my core standards of quality and authenticity.

As an added bonus, the critical response to "309" has consistently backed up that assertion. A development that, while absolutely not essential, certainly doesn't hurt. :)