posted
Are you deterred by chapter length? Or biased? Are editors?
It's strange. Reading shorter books, I like longer chapters, but reading large fantasy epics (or sci-fi, or any long book, really), I find I prefer shorter chapters. I don't know why.
Writing my own story, each chapter is 5-10 pages long. I don't know if this is indicative of a larger novel, since the ending is kind of murky at the moment.
posted
Chapter length is one of the least regulated things in fiction. The author is pretty much free to do whatever he or she choose. That said, I almost always prefer shorter chapter. Not really short, but shortER. My current novel has chapters that average 2600 words. This is about 5 pages single spaced in times new roman. (That's obviously not how it iwll be formatted when I mail it in.)
Shorter chapters keep me going. When I'm about ready to put a book down but I see that the next chapter is only a few pages long I think, "Just a little while longer." When I get to the end of a dauntingly long chapter I am much more likely to take a break. But that's personal preference.
posted
I'm the same way. I prefer shorter chapters, under 15 pages. My reading time is invariably broken up into small chunks, while I grab a smoke, or while in the toilet, etc. So it's nice to be a able to read through a chapter and have a nice stopping point. I know if I only have maybe 10 minutes to read, and I see that the next chapter is over 10 pages long, I will generally pass on the reading because I don't want to be in the middle of the chapter and have to stop.
Posts: 552 | Registered: Dec 2004
|
When I read, I find I like chapters that are about 10-20 pages long. This also tends to be the way I write my chapters.
That said, I recently discovered the joy of reading Douglas Adams' Hitchhicker's series and most of the chapters are quite short. I think this gives the books a particular pace. I can read several chapters and, if they are short, it feels like I have accomplished a lot; aquired a lot of information; or moved quickly through the story. I know this is a pschological reaction, but it does have an effect on the way I perceive the story.
posted
I read some general advice once about chapter lengths that recommended doing short chapters... only in that the reader will be more apt to keep reading if he/she sees the chapter is really short. "Oh, I'll just finish this chapter..." extends to halfway through a book before they know it.
But I don't think it really matters in the long run. A fast pace within a long chapter works the same way for me.
[This message has been edited by HSO (edited February 09, 2005).]
posted
I notice in the case that I plan to not read the book in one sitting. In that case, chapters between 5 and 10 pages long are probably best. Any shorter and it wouldn't be meaningful to call them chapters, anything more and I'm less willing to start a new chapter.
That said, I almost never plan on not reading a book in one sitting unless it's reference or I just don't like the book that much.
posted
I'm sure I've read books with no chapter divisions and those with many. Personally I don't care unless the part of the story I'm at is slow or boring and then I like HSO's advice. A short chapter will likely keep me reading past the part I find boring, rather than just putting the book down and maybe never picking it up again. (Which I have done on more than one occasion.)
Posts: 497 | Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted
Not all parts of a book are fast-paced ane xciting. Even if still interesting, the pace has to slow down sometimes.
That said, I truthfully don't care that much. Shorter chapters is a vague preference, not even close to a deal breaker. Do what works for your story.
I did read a book one by someone (I wnt to say James Patterson but I really might be wrong) that had 3 page chapters....in large print! I actually found it to be annoying because nothing substantial ever seemed to happen in one chapter. It felt bouncy and jagged.
posted
I think in some writing newsletter, an article was written by the writer of "Nobody Get's The Girl". Never read it. Shame on me.
But anyway, he recommended shorter chapters. I think he called it the potato chip theory. Something to the effect that when people snack, chips are less intimidating then a whole potato, and often the snacker will end up polishing off the whole bag before they know it. Too this effect, also recommended ending many chapters in cliffhangers.
posted
ChrisOwens, the article was by James Maxey (a Hatrack participant), and it was printed in the Science Fiction and Fantasy Workshop newsletter (which I edit).
Posts: 8826 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
|
posted
I've been debating with myself over whether or not I should comment here, and goatboy's post made me decide to do it.
I recently finished reading THE DAVINCI CODE (yeah, I know, I'm slow--you should see how high my To Be Read pile is), and it's a good example of what goatboy is talking about.
I tend to get very frustrated with authors who jump from characters I am interested in to characters I couldn't care less about in a novel. Brown did this in THE DAVINCI CODE. (I enjoyed the mystery, but I found Silas boring and Bishop "ringaroundtherosies" extremely boring.)
Because the chapters were short, I was able to tolerate the jumps away from the mystery to the characters I didn't care about.
I also realized that one of the things I love about LORD OF THE RINGS is that Tolkien doesn't jump back and forth among the characters (though with his characters, all of whom I care about, it wouldn't have been so bad). They had to jump around during the movies, but Tolkien didn't jump around in the books. (He didn't have particularly short chapters either.)
posted
That's a good point, Kathleen. Your post reminded me of George R.R. Martin, the biggest literary bone of contetnion between my husband and I. He loves him, I hate him. Well, his stuff, I'm sure he's a perfectly nice guy. Anyway, one of the problems it that he jumps from characters I care about to characters I don't and because of the long chapters, I know he's not going to get back to one of the ones I like for a long time. I gave up halfway through the second book and don't intend to pick him up again.
Posts: 3567 | Registered: May 2003
|
posted
Christine, I quit reading that series with the first book because he had the only character I started out caring about make a stupid mistake that got himself killed less than halfway through the book.
There were other characters I was beginning to be interested in by the time he did that, but I didn't trust him any more in that series.
And I think George R.R. Martin is an excellent writer in spite of all that.
posted
Christine, you might want to try something that I saw OSC recommend. I've tried it, and liked it, with Harry Turtledove's work, as well as with Martin.
Read all the chapters of the same character straight through, and then go back and do the same for the other characters. That way, you can stick with the characters you enjoy and skip the ones you do not.
posted
Yeah, Card recommended that to me at boot camp the year I went. Trouble is, I get the books on tape and there's no good way to find the beginnings of chapters. Tapes are just not meant for skimming.
Sigh. I wish more people would release large print versions of their books. If I .... no WHEN I get published, I will insist upon a large print edition on principal. I figure a legally blind author ought to be able to read her own book!
posted
I agree with you christine, it's one of the reasons that I read so many children's books. The typeface is larger. It makes no sense to waste larger font on a ten year old and then get stinky with the ink on adults.
Posts: 497 | Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted
I don't remember where I read it (might have been OSC), but someone once advised that you keep the chapters on the short side AND that the first few chapters be EXCEPTIONALLY short. The point being that you get a lot done in those first few very short chapters to endear your reader to the characters, which makes them want to keep reading. Then, later in the book, when you come to a point in which a longer chapter or so is needed to convey the needed information, the reader is more likely to tolerate that longer chapter.
On the DaVinci code--the extremely short chapters kept me reading, but also kept me agitated. I suppose one feeds the other.
I've found, as I've learned more about writing and pay more attention to these things, that I enjoy reading a book that starts out with short chapters AND has a variety of chapter lengths. AND that I don't like scene breaks between long (ish) scenes. If you're going to break for a scene, why not just make a new chapter?
The Lord of the Rings, bored me to tears. I somehow managed to not read this tome until the films came out (in my 32rd year :-). I loved the movies and was pretty familiar with the novels, even though I had not read them. So I decided to sit down and read them, it was like clawing at my eyes while being submerged in lemon juice.
I respect what Lord of the Rings means, and understand that is created the genre of High Fantasy. I understand that his exhaustive descriptions and explanation were neccesary since a great deal of the creatures and concepts had never been promoted in this genre or manner before. But I've seen toast in the Saharra that is less dry.
That said, I have a question to Christine.
Are you referring to Eddard making a stupid mistake or someone else?
The only other major character that gets offed is Viserys and his death was definately in character...as was Eddards if you catch the subplot regarding Jon Snow's parentage, that is supported by Eddards choice.
I personally love that Martin kills characters the way he does, in any other fantasy series I would be concerned about a character dying, but would also be confident that the character would be safe since they are an integral part of the story. In Martins books, I care about every character more, because I don't know how much longer they will be around. Apparent importance to plot is no safeguard in a Martin book.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
I get published, I will insist upon a large print edition on principal. I figure a legally blind author ought to be able to read her own book!
