I read my own book many, many times, and each time I read it I always learned new things, and each time I enjoyed it more and more.
-- Kevin Wong, on the first novel in his Heroes of Destiny trilogy1
In 1999, Justin Kruger and David Dunning published a study in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology that caused a jolt of recognition in almost everyone who read it. These two psychologists demonstrated that people who are terrible at something cannot recognize their own incompetence. The classic example is the guy with the lousy sense of humour who repeats the same pointless, unfunny jokes at parties over and over again, laughing loudly each time, blissfully unaware of how annoying he's being. It turns out that the part of the brain that is responsible for a good sense of humour is the same part of the brain that recognizes a good sense of humour. To quote Kruger and Dunning, "people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people make erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it."2
There is something oddly compelling about a person who is mediocre at what he does and yet possessed of complete confidence in it. Kevin Wong's novel, Heroes of Destiny, is no different from the literally hundreds of works-in-progress that I've seen churn through the queue in online writing workshops, but Wong's certainty that it is the greatest novel ever written makes its (rather ordinary) flaws strange and fascinating.
Like many first-time writers, Wong has never learned the rule of "show, don't tell," meaning that every thought that flits through his characters' minds must be laboriously explained. Important concepts are signalled, not by powerful writing or clever images, but rather by exhausting strings of exclamation points. Random words are put into boldface or italics or uppercase, sometimes all three. Wong always has his bullhorn out, and he will use it to make the most banal observations.
As she had a tendency to do with her precious son, Kevin's mom became angry with Kevin, and he knew that she was about to start yelling at him. Although in her mind she probably thought that she was still just talking, Kevin heard his mother's words to him in a rather different tone as she said, or rather, yelled, to him, "Your father took the test too soon as well!!!!! I didn't agree with him about it then, and I'm CERTAINLY not agreeing with you about it now!!!!!"
Wong shamelessly and transparently inserts himself into his story: the main character in Heroes of Destiny is called Kevin, and his name is repeated in practically every sentence. Wong is of course not the first author to create a fictionalized version of himself; it's a popular technique in postmodern fiction, designed to create an ironic distance between the author and his representation. But Wong is utterly incapable of irony: "Kevin"-the-character serves as a sock puppet for Kevin-the-author. From "Kevin," we learn all of Kevin's opinions about politics, war, love, and parenthood. The novel is as didactic as a medieval morality play: its characters lecture us about the evils of sex before marriage, and then, in case we missed the point, we are subjected to exactly the same lecture on the author's web page.
And as the ultimate reference as to why I believe one should wait until marriage before giving away the priceless gift of one's virginity, I would hope that one would read my Heroes of Destiny books, because all of my feelings on the matter are spelled out in them in exacting detail and with heartrending emotion.
Wong's description of his book as a "reference" is telling. Despite all the castles and demons and princesses and stuff, it's really quite hard to think of this book as fiction; Wong simply cannot imagine a hero thinking any differently about anything than he himself does. (I was considering doing a Marxist analysis of Wong's narrow vision of utopia, along with a side-rant about the way every fantasy culture in the history of the genre has to have a monarchy and a gold standard. But perhaps this isn't the time or place.)
Anyway. I'm not saying anything that Wong doesn't admit himself. When a fan tells Kevin that she likes "Kevin," he gleefully informs her that it means she likes him. What he doesn't mention is that Kevin is a computer science major from Halifax, while "Kevin" is a demonslaying hero from the land of Eternia. All fiction probably contains an element of wish-fulfilment, but when it is this raw and naked, reading it is a little embarrassing, kind of like reading a high-schooler's love letters.
Like many first-time writers, Wong makes pretty much every single mistake in the Turkey City lexicon: countersinking, As-You-Know-Bobbing, pushbutton words, and so on.3 Of course, everybody has to start somewhere, and even the very best writers, even at the height of their careers, will occasionally slip up, boring their readers with an infodump or handwaving away a difficult plot point. I would never condemn a writer for stumbling in this way; my house is made of glass.
However, Wong firmly believes that anyone who criticizes his work simply does not see his brilliance. Worse, he seizes every possible opportunity to dig for compliments from his readers. "Compared to the first Harry Potter book, did you enjoy reading my book more?" he asks a correspondent. "Out of curiosity, do you have a favourite chapter from my book? If so, what chapter was your favourite? Also out of my own curiosity, do you like how I wrote my story with gender-neutral language, and how I made the many girls and women in my story equal to or even better than boys and men?" "What was your favourite line or quote from my book? (I have quite a few favourite sentences / lines / quotes myself!)"
The very existence of the Turkey City Lexicon demonstrates that Wong's mistakes as a storyteller are made over and over again by hundreds and hundreds of inexperienced writers. Publishers' slush piles are filled with manuscripts that resemble Heroes of Destiny in every way. What's interesting about Kevin Wong is not the mistakes, but the sheer extent of his inability to recognize them. Even the worst authors I encountered in workshops usually recognized that there was something better to which they could aspire. Usually they had read books that they felt were superior than their own, even if they couldn't articulate exactly how.
Wong's web page, by contrast, is littered with assurances of his greatness. The only reason why an editor might want to change something he's written is to "compromise" it. Wong will not go to a publishing house because he needs to maintain "creative control."
And when it comes to my second and third Heroes of Destiny books, I need to have creative control even more so, because in these books - particularly the second book: Sacrifice of the Gods - I will be speaking of topics that are very dark and upsetting, and I know that no regular publisher would ever let me write what it is I am going to write - in the manner that I am going to write it.
I am not sure what "topic" Wong is referring to here, since the second and third volumes of his trilogy aren't written yet and I haven't seen them. But when I think about the trends in bestseller lists in the U.S. over the past few years, it's hard for me to come up with a topic that hasn't been addressed frankly: rape, drug addiction, poverty, incest, genocide. Not only are these books finding publishers, they're becoming blockbusters. This means that Wong is either unaware of the existence of the bulk of contemporary literature (which is possible, since a lot of amateur fantasy writers read nothing but fantasy), or he is so sure that his book is categorically different from every other book ever written that he can't see any reason for rejecting it other than its "dark" themes.
Though Wong frequently describes himself as humble, and though he seems genuinely grateful to the people who buy his book, and though he has a laudable desire to make the world a better place, there is a hint of bullying beneath all the aw-shucks. Nowhere on this web site did I find any trace of receptivity to new ideas: sex before marriage is bad, and Heroes of Destiny is good, and there is no room set aside for discussion of the matter.
What's interesting is that the best writers in the history of literature are all uncompromising in this way. Truly brilliant writers fight with editors and publishers -- and sometimes they even fight with their readers. They buck trends and break taboos. They write things that are unusual about topics that are uncomfortable. They wrestle with their demons, whose blood spills out onto the paper. They keep writing, even if it makes them unemployed and unloved. They are difficult people, and it's often their genius that makes them difficult.
What, then, do we do with an amateurish writer who adopts the stance of the genius? I don't know the answer to that. But I do find myself returning over and over again to Kevin Wong's web site, transfixed by his bad prose and his self-absorption.
1 All quotes from Kevin Wong are taken from his web page at
http://www.kevinwong.ca.
2 Kruger and Dunning's study, "
Unskilled and Unaware of it: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Leads To Inflated Self-Assessments," is available in its entirety at
this website. It's definitely worth reading.
3 Please,
please read that link if you aspire to be any kind of writer. Please. I do recognize that not everything on that list is a cardinal sin, and I also recognize that even cardinal sins can be forgiven in good writers. But there is no excuse for lazy, repetitive writing, especially since every single flaw on the Turkey City list can be fixed with a bit of care, practice, and attention.