posted
In the novel I'm working on, I have several different story arcs: - Heroine who gets off on a side mystery that leads her on a quest, ultimately bringing her in touch with the Hero #2 - Villain who is desperately trying to bring about his plans - Sidebar: Good Guys who are trying to stop villain because they know about his plans - Hero #1 is a close and very powerful friend of the Heroine who, in trying to stop the villain, will ultimately betray the Heroine "for the greater good." - Sidebar: Neutral Guys (3) who play minor roles in both the Hero's and Villain's plans
At first, these are mostly disjointed and although well written/engaging/entertaining (I hope), they don't necessarily look at first like they piece together. About midway through the book (say around chap 15) the Reader starts to get that, "Ohhhh... Something's going on here." And a few chapters later, the Reader has a "WOW! Oh my god, I see the light" kind of ephiphany where all of the previously separate story threads suddenly come together. And that's where the real heavy duty action comes in. (Loads of action beforehand, but now we're getting into the thick of it.)
My question is that while I want this to be a very fleshed out, gritty real, epic... I also don't want to lose my Readers. One of the readers plugging through the novel-in-progress says that while it's a good read, he's getting to a "So what?" phase because he feels the story arcs are so disjointed.
My question is whether this is a valid approach to storytelling? I felt it was vitally important to establish these story arcs-- characters, and the history, and the conflict-- needed the time to grow and evolve so that when we get to the WOW Part, it is just that. WOW and climatic.
posted
Yikes! If it really takes until chapter 15 for readers to start getting the hint that several story lines are connected, than, yes, you have too many.
Now, if you were doing this Robert Jordan style, you only have a fifth as many story lines as you need.
posted
You don't say how you're presenting the arcs. Are they told simultaneously in the same text, or separately as Part I, Part II, Part III? From the reaction of your reader, I'd guess you're doing it simultaneously. If the arcs are so distinct from each other, I'd think that Parts I, II and III would work better, with all the arcs converging in Part IV.
Posts: 1810 | Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted
I have read some very good series of books that had more sub plots than you even knew about until later on. I guess the point is how you do it. Do readers like being a bit confused about the overall goal while you lead them down a few paths that are enjoyable? I do.
The real question is can you keep the story lines interesting enough to not confuse the reader badly enough to stop reading. How many you can peice together is up to your abilities. If you are having doubts then maybe you do, or maybe you are just doubting whether the reader will be smart enough to figure it out. Don't worry about it. Write your story, then let someone tell you if you pull it off.
posted
I think it's a question of trust more than anything else. I have read plenty of novels that have multiple plot threads (Tom Clancy does it a lot), and I expect that everything, no matter how remote it seems at first, will tie into the plot eventually. I'm willing to trust that there's a reason why a new plot thread is being introduced, and I think a lot of readers are willing to do that. (Witness the success of Robert Jordan, George R. R. Martin, etc.)
It sounds to me like you are not planning on betraying that trust, so there's no problem as long as each story arc is at least somewhat interesting on its own.
If you did betray that trust, then the novel would feel unsatisfactory.
[This message has been edited by EricJamesStone (edited January 25, 2004).]
posted
And I guess I should have said that I'm introducing the arcs "organically." Heroine and Hero#1 are initially together when he tells her that he senses some kind of threat to the south so he goes off on his own quest... As he discovers that the threat is in the capital, the next story arc which takes place in the capital appears. The Villain doesn't appear until the Hero realizes that the Villain is there. Similarly, no arc and no new character is introduced without an immediate prior indication that they would be popping up.
And yes, it's all simultaneously done. I think that a reader used to reading Martin or Jordan will see that there are hints of "unity" in the threads, even though they are separate now.
posted
Write it, I can understand you have concerns. The problem with concerns is that we don't write. Can you tell I have the same problem.. Just do your best, if you have it thought out well then anything wrong should be fixable. From what you have explained it sounds like you have a pretty good idea of what you want to do, so do it.
posted
Sounds all good to me. Especially since you mentioned that the threads crop up as and when they, well, crop up. Hero 1's solo thread crops up when he needs to leave, fine and dandy. I think a lot of readers will appreciate being allowed to follow Hero 1 when he leaves the first thread.
posted
This happened with my book to an extreme, as far as I'm concerned. I had a story that was pretty much your typical group of good guys going to find out what was wrong and figuring out that the problem was bigger than they thought, and they collect allies as they go. Eventually I realized that there wasn't enough explanation of why all these things were happening. Not enough background. So I started writing all these short(ish) background stories, and it grew exponentially.... I had thirteen separate stories all happening more or less simultaneously and I finally realized that it was too much to stuff into one book. Now, though, I'm at a loss. I can't just get rid of these stories, because they're there in my head wanting to be told. But my intention is to write one book. I don't know how to do it, and it's really been keeping me from getting anything done.
Posts: 239 | Registered: Jun 2000
|
posted
That's certainly something I've considered. Most of the stories stand alone to a certain extent, but none of them have proper endings that offer a real resolution. The various conflicts don't really end before the larger story does. They're rather like one big prologue. In any case, I'm going to write them, because having them on paper (or as 1s and 0s on a hard drive) will assuredly make the assembly of my story into its proper form much easier.
Posts: 239 | Registered: Jun 2000
|
In SF and Fantasy, series of books are no longer the exception to the rule, they almost are the rule. Sometimes this is for silly reasons, but other times it is because the author has woven such a complex story that it requires more than 1 book to tell it.
I am a huge fan of complex stories, and therefore a fan of the trilogy. My own novel in progress has become the first in a trilogy, and I'm excited about it. I tie up a few threads at the end of this book so that it does come to an ending (because I do appreciate having some closure when I close a book), but some of the major arcs are not yet complete.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
Just do your best, if you have it thought out well then anything wrong should be fixable. From what you have explained it sounds like you have a pretty good idea of what you want to do, so do it. 
