I've talked several times on the blog about I structure with structure, and we even talked about spiral structures for a while. It this point, as I grind through finishing the connecting-the-dots chapters in Sublimation, the structure is pretty much set, barring word from someone wiser than me that, in the end, it doesn't work. I'm pretty confident, after one major tweak to clarify some things, that I have the structure that is best for the novel.
Without giving too much away, I thought it might interest you, since you've call helped me though some tough moments in this weak aspect of mine, I thought I might describe for the structure of Sublimation as it now stands:
First, the book is in three parts. That's mildly ironic but I don't really get the normal three-act structure; it doesn't click with me in any meaningful way. In this case, though, three acts are for my own Hegelian purposes. (If you wonder what that means, side-step over to pick up some Nevetsosophy.)
Second, in case you don't already know the story is told through two distinct first person POV's -- one, Mr. Alec Smith, a business man who cons his way to victory in every situation, and the other, Mrs. Grey Kinjou, a ex-cop who values the Law above all else and has no time for people who play in the shadows. The odd number chapters all belong to Smith and the even to Kinjou.
So the super-structure of the novel is something like a building made of two towers, each of which has three levels.
The apparently primary story line happens in a very linear way, each each of the POV's moving forward. There are a few places where they are not in perfect sync with one another, but each POV at least moves straight forward.
Except that each POV also has another story-line inside it. Those two story lines, which are not exactly flashbacks even though I myself sometimes even get lazy and call them that, are scenes from earlier in each POV's life. They're not linear. They jump around, appearing to follow character development arcs more than plot development.
Appearances, of course, can be deceiving.
In truth, it's all one big narrative with frayed edges that curl back on itself.
Sound like fun?
I think so!
What kind of structures are you playing with in whatever you're writing right now?
.Nevets.
Sounds complicated to me. I follow a simple rule- beginning middle and an end. Give characters lots of bad things to challenge them, happy ending- sometimes.
ReplyDeleteStructure? This may require a lot of thought. I'm discovering I write in a certain way, but I'm not sure this equates to overall story structure. .
ReplyDeleteI show a character in her natural environment, introduce a situational change, up the tension with personal and plot conflicts, bring everything to a climax, and resolve the issues.
Not always with a padded ending though.
Is that structure?
...........dhole
So long as the story can be read linearly and make sense to the reader, I can't see how the structure will be a problem. I recently read an Iain Banks novel with alternating chapters in reversing timelines - once I understood the structure it made sense, but early on it was very disorienting (and I'd have given up if it was, say, just a loaner from the library).
ReplyDeletePersonally, I'm about a fifth of the way through drafting a fairly linear story. Linear in terms of timeline at least, however I'm also juggling multiple viewpoints and an omniscient narrator, both of which are well outside my comfort zone. So when the niggling fears set in I remind myself: It's only the draft.
Interesting subject. I tend to have weird and wonderful architecture in my novels. Light Reading is prob the most straightforward of these, with two major POVs moving chronologically. The new novel has five POVs, some past, some present. The action is not chronological, and some events are replayed by different characters at different moments. Am hoping all this will work...! I do enjoy the challenge, though. My first proper novel had 7 POVs. I love multiple perspectives. I reckon if I drew them, they'd look a bit like Angkor Wat.
ReplyDelete@Summer - There's nothing wrong with simple structure, that's for sure! :)
ReplyDelete@Donna - That definitely sounds like the making of structure. It sounds like a linear checkmark type structure, divided into about three parts with a couple of sub-parts.
@Ben - It is definitely important that your structure be understood. If the reader is confused, that's a problem. When I first let a couple of folks read the first part of Sublimation, I didn't have sufficient structural cues in the pieces and they were both utterly flummoxed. It didn't take anything major to fix that, but it made a world of difference. Good luck with your project. It's always fun-but-scary to stretch yourself like that!
@Aliya - Angkor Wat structure sounds awesome. I'm so glad I got my new glasses and can move through my TBR pile more swiftly again. Light Reading is next on my queue. I love how you play around a little with the structure in your short stories, and I'm interested to see how you do it on a novel scale, even if in a pretty straight-up one.
The editorial notes didn't require too much monkeying with your fun structure in the new novel, I hope?
I keep trying to have a very linear structure, but I always fail. My most recent story has three parts, and the second part is a long flashback section. That's fairly simple at least! I think only twice have I been able to write a totally linear story, and both of those were very short pieces.
ReplyDelete@Domey - I've written several things linearly, but I find they're not as strong. I'm not sure if that's because I don't write as well in a traditional, straight-up linear mode or because when I re-read them, they don't resonate with me as well as a reader. Maybe it's both.
ReplyDeleteThe structure of the book I'm working on now is fairly linear.
ReplyDeleteThanks Nevets. I'm satisfied that I DO have structure :)
ReplyDelete.......dhole
I just got the comment you made on my blog. You just made my day. I came here to tell you because I wanted to make sure you were aware of how happy I am that you 1. Made a great joke, and 2. Used an improv phrase. My respect for you has risen drastically.
ReplyDelete@G'Eagle - Linear's good!
ReplyDelete@Donna - haha I'm sure you do. :)
@Trish - haha Thanks, glad you liked it. I had a few friends who did improv in college, and one of my really good friends still does improv regularly in her hometown. I did it myself for a year on the radio, once a week for about three hours.