posted
i've been having difficulties finding a way to spice up a boring, frankly introductory part of a novel i'm writing. it has to be there--it sets the mood and, hopefully, the readers mind a certain way--but i find it dull.
all but giving up, i started writing a YA peice that incorporates a lot of jumping around in the order of events. the peice isn't something i'll ever do anything with--i use it now to get my creative juices flowing for "real" writing--but i think the lack of chronological order may work well for my novel.
does anyone know of a peice that has used this method successfully? also, if anyone else has been in a similar situation, i could use some advice. Thanks.
posted
One of the best "hopping around" novels i have read recently is "Gates of Fire," by Steven Pressfield. It is an historical novel about the Battle at Thermopylae. There are many others, but this one jumped out at me. I know one way writers often accomplish this is to have a person who is telling a story, looking back on the events of their life, and giving bits and pieces of the past as the main character lives in their present. I think it is very difficult to do well, so good luck.
Posts: 34 | Registered: Jun 2001
|
posted
Cosmi, Gabriel Garcia Marquez has a short novel entitled CHRONICLE OF A DEATH FORETOLD that is all "skipping around." It starts out by telling the reader that by the end of the day, a man in the village will be murdered, and spends the rest of the novel jumping around in time to show why, even though the villagers knew it was going to happen, they were unable to prevent it.
The purpose, so far as I could tell, of the jumping around was to show the motivation for the murder, and the effects it had later on the people of the village, all while the main storyline takes place on the day of the murder.
I've been told that this is called a "revelatory" novel because the sequence of events, not being chronological, is not to show "what happened next" but to reveal things about the people in the village over time.
Because skipping around is a relatively unconventional approach to storytelling, if you want it to work, you have to have a very good reason for doing it that way. So you have to think about how the various scenes relate to each other in ways other than coming in some kind of chronological order.
Another example is Ford Maddox Ford's THE GOOD SOLDIER, which is told more or less as if the narrator and reader/listener are a couple of old friends sitting facing each other in front of a fireplace and catching up on the past. The skipping around works more along the lines of "oh, I forgot to mention this part," and "before I tell you this, I need to go back and explain something," so the scenes relate to each other in a "that reminds me" kind of way.
(I hope this all makes sense.)
Anyway, skipping around works, but you have to be sure that you fulfill the three responsibilities writers have to their readers (according to Orson Scott Card), and those are to answer the "faith, hope, and clarity" questions:
Faith: oh, yeah? (you have to make it believable to the reader)
Hope: so what? (you have to make the reader care)
Clarity: huh? (you have to make sure it makes sense to the reader)
With skipping around, the clarity is especially important.
posted
I can give you one name that will answer your questions about nonlinear novels: Kurt Vonnegut Jr. In particular Slaughterhouse V and Timequake. Of course, Vonnegut is a very specialized taste so the question of his hopping around working is purely up to the reader.
I just saw a movie that hopped around in a strict chronological order. Look up Memento if you are interested in seeing what timeplay does in the movies.
posted
ok...this is way off topic,i think...but it does have to do with skipping around. I do the same thing you do, Cosmi, I write one story I know i'll never show to anyone because it's pure fluff to get my mind working, and then hop over to my 'serious' story.
I skip around in it, though... not that it will be like that in the end, but i write the exciting parts first, the parts i'm interested in writing. Does this seem like a bad idea? I haven't had consistentcy(is that a word?) issues yet, but i'm thinking i might, if I get careless.
that's the best part of those "fluff" bits. you get to do the exciting stuff--basically, whatever you're in the mood for. mine actually helps me get off a particular "mood" when the piece is done with that section. i wanna keep going, even if that means switching gears. i can then move to my "real" work.
if you have consistancy issues later on, you can always scrap stuff, or start over with that or another piece. i wouldn't worry about it.
(Monty Python rules!)
all~
thanks for the references! i'm sure they'll be a lot of help!
TTFN & lol
Cosmi
[This message has been edited by Cosmi (edited January 04, 2002).]
posted
kwsni, there is no rule anywhere that says a story has to be written in the order it is going to be read.
In fact, if you write the parts that you find exciting, when you find them exciting, they are more likely to be interesting to the reader as well.
If you wait to write the exciting parts until you get to that point in the story, you run the risk of losing your excitement for that part of the story.
Since you ought to figure on at least one rewrite after you have all the scenes written down, you can write the scenes in any order you choose and let the rewrite be where you smooth them all together.
Sometimes, you'll find that once you have the exciting stuff (which is probably also the most important stuff in the story) written, there won't be much smoothing needed to get them to fit together after all.
So, yes, absolutely. Write the exciting stuff first. Then write the stuff that is exciting to you next, and so on.
It's one of the many ways a story can be done. (Remember, they don't film movie scenes in the order in which they will be shown in the movie, either.)
posted
On the novel I'm working on, it's entirely being written out of order. I write in "sections," approximately 4-6 chapters each. This helps make sure that I don't lose any continuity in the various story arcs I'm weaving together. I started with the arc that was the hardest (but also most exciting), and once that was finished, moved to the 2nd hardest arc; and so on. When all done, I will "shuffle" the chapters back into order that you'd read them. It's worked well for me, and gives me a real sense of accomplishment when I complete a "section."
If you use a particularly unfamiliar format like nonsequential scene narration, then every sequence must must must be entirely able to stand on its own as a short, contained, enticing narrative that makes the reader want to read more, or you will fail.
I mention this particularly because in the beginning you say
quote:...spice up a boring, frankly introductory part of a novel i'm writing. it has to be there--it sets the mood and, hopefully, the readers mind a certain way...
and if setting the mood or introducing story elements is still a relevant concern, then you should steer clear of this particular technique.
That being said, I would encourage you to explore writing in this fashion, it can be a very good way to gain inspiration. And if you end up with something that can be published in that form, you'll really make an impression on your readers.
[This message has been edited by Survivor (edited January 12, 2002).]