%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 A message forum for general discussion. Please come and chat with others! |
| Hi all, I'd appreciate your help. I'm currently planning out the scenes for my suspense novel. It's a multiple shifting viewpoint novel (4 viewpoint characters in total, of whom only three are 'on stage' for the first two thirds of the book). The fourth character doesn't make an appearance until the final third of the book, although when she does come on stage, her actions are the critical ones that bring the conflict to a conclusion. She is, in a way, the answer to my main protagonist's prayers, making her appearance just when all hope seems lost, and acting decisively to bring things to a positive conclusion. My question is: Is it acceptable to introduce a pivotal character only in the final third of the book and yet still have that character carry out the decisive action that brings the conflict to a head? My fourth character has a complex back story that informs all of her actions and illustrates how she comes to be in the right place at the right time. I've thought of bringing her 'on stage' earlier and showing her in some scenes that illustrate her lifestyle and personality and explain the context behind her later pivotal actions, but these 'character-setting' scenes would have nothing whatsover to do with the main arc of the story. She really doesn't have any link, overlap or connection with the other main characters or with the main story thread (which unfolds in chronological order) until the 11th hour, when she just happens to be in the right place at the right time and makes her game-changing intervention. I'd welcome your thoughts.... |
| There are two things I'd be thinking about in this situation. The first is to ask myself whether the 4th character is just a device to help bring about the conclusion I want. If that's true, then I would rethink that character. Think of it this way: you have a story where the protagonist is clearly not competent to defeat the antagonist, but right at the last minute they trip up and spy a handy weapon under the sofa and can therefore win the day. This is artifice in such glaring terms the reader is going to question its validity. The second is to ask myself whether I can sneak the character in earlier. There is absolutely no problem in having a thread which seems to bear absolutely no relationship to the rest of the story - a scene here and there sprinkled through the story that tells the 4th character's tale. The reader will be left wondering why of course, but when that thread collides with the main protagonist's (at the point you have already slated for the character's introduction), it will all suddenly make sense. Many stories are written this way - two (or more) disparate threads that seem unrelated, yet will eventually come together and the reader will discover the relationship between the threads and the reason they were reading them in the first place. If you leave it too long to introduce the character, you are in danger of turning them into a device to keep the story on-track. If the reader sees them this way, then the author's hand is exposed and all immersion is lost. On the other hand, you may have enough time to explore that character in the remainder of the story such that the immersion isn't lost. Since only you know the story, this will have to be a judgement call on your part. The good news is you can try both ways. Try it with the late introduction and then when you've finished your first draft, read the story and see how you feel about it. If you think you need to introduce the character to the reader earlier, it would be simple enough to sprinkle a few additional scenes throughout your story. |
| Thanks Zen. My main concern is that if I leave her out until she makes her decisive appearance she will seem like a deux ex machina, and that's the last thing I want. However, I also don't want her disconnected storyline to weaken the early part of the book and leave readers wondering what the hell she has to do with anything... In my mind she's a complex character in her own right, with her own story arc that both explains how she got to the position where she currently is, and also makes her later actions when her arc collides with the main story arc understandable and in character. She's certainly not a 'filler' character; she was actually going to be my main protagonist during most of my planning of this novel, and it's a relatively recent development for her to have been demoted to a more subsidiary role. I've decided to play around with weaving her story into the novel from the begining, with her own unique plot line and her own (minor) supporting cast of characters. It will be possible, I think, because she is rough sleeper and her 'patch' is the seedy area of the city where some of the pivotal scenes of the story play out. I think I could feasibly work in a couple of earlier scenes where her curiousity has been piqued by some suspicious looking comings and goings at one of the warehouses, and so it's credible that she's observant and alert to anything out of the ordinary that a regular passer by might overlook. Also, as almost 'part of the furniture' of the neighbourhood, she might not attract attention and set alarm bells ringing in my main characters in the way that a stranger would. I'm going away to have a play around with the idea.... |
| Zen's really smart, and I agree. Zen is not me, and I wasn't paid to say that. :) The people in the start of your book are most likely to be considered the protagonists. Having a 4th person appear at the end of the book to solve the problem, means that the protagonists didn't. That smells a lot like Deus Ex Machina in its less heavenly scented form. I'll say this broadly, people hate that crap. This would be like some new character, Zig Zippo showing up in a random x-wing to nail the bombing run after Luke's failed attempt, saving the day. What the Smurf?! Who's that guy, and why have we been watching Shortbus Luke for the last 2 hours when Zig's the real hero. I'll also say you're in danger of creating a show-stealer. Why is this 4th character (I'll call her Jane) got her own back story, motivations, unrelated time table of stuff she's doing like she's an independent bad guy hunter and has no clue these other 3 clowns are on the same case. So she has all that AND she's the one who actually closes the case. Making all those other characters irrelevant. A writer should remove any irrelevant, non-impactful words. 20 chapters of people who don't matter is exactly that. Now's let's pretend your story was this (so I have something real to speak to, since I don't know the gist of your story): Tom, Dick, and Harry have gotten involved in trying to solve a series of jewel heists. They bumble along until the end, when right as they're held at gun point by the burglar (at least they found him), Jane bursts through the glass and nabs him. She'd been on trail of the Soylent Panther for weeks. She has no idea who these other guys are, but they seem harmless. Let's fix the plot. Same deal with Tom, Dick and Harry. But this time, they keep running into Jane, messing up HER attempts to nab the Soylent Panther because they aren't coordinating. Only by the end do they find a way to cooperate because she wants the reward money, and Tom just wants his grandma's priceless Gem back because it was on loan to the Jeffersonian Museum. In my example, I've created TWO story questions (MDQ's as Lakin calls them which stands for something). One, will they get Grandma's Gem back. Two, will they solve a personal problem that is in their way, namely, getting along with Jane. It's not a great example, and totally doesn't apply to your plot. But you can see how I set Jane up to interweave in the story AND create a new problem for them to solve, which in turn would solve the main problem. |
| Excellent points, Ken, proving you are smarter than me (and no, I wasn't paid to say that). I'd like to point out that making your protagonist irrelevant is literary suicide, which is more or less what Ken was saying, but luckily we have a very famous example of this. Raiders of the Lost Ark. As a movie, it works because we don't get time to think about things, we just get dragged along from one exciting (and funny) scene to the next. However, as a novel it would probably never have made it into print (unless someone made a movie out of it). The reason is simple: Indiana Jones is irrelevant to the story. With or without him, the Nazi's get the Ark, take it to the island and open it. He doesn't even get to put it in a museum, which was the demand he made for getting involved in the first place. Neither does Jones emerge at the end a better character. There has been no evolution from internal-conflict resolution, nor has he fixed an error from his past. He did get back together with his old squeeze, but pay attention to the reasons they broke up in the first place and you'll see that even this isn't character advancement. Reader's use a different part of the brain than movie-watchers, and they get much more time to think about things. At the end of the novel they'd be wondering why they were following Jones and not one of the Nazi's (who'd probably be pretty interesting and we'd really like to see them get their come-uppance). Your protagonist (not necessarily the POV character, as in the case of Sherlock Holmes where the POV is with Watson) must play a critical role at the end, even if they fail. As Ken suggested, sometimes you have to rethink your story. I've written stories where I've realised, after writing the first draft, that I've concentrated on the wrong character. I've mentioned before the difference between plot and story. Sometimes I've realised the basic plot was good but I've got the wrong story, or the right story and the wrong plot. Sometimes you have to write the first draft to see these things. My current novel, which I'm writing for the fifth time (from scratch) typifies this. The plot is great, but I had quite the wrong story. In the first draft of the third version, I realised the protagonist was a passenger in the story. Imagine that, writing a story three times before you spot something that bad. Why was she a passenger? Because she never did anything that changed the direction of the story or changed the outcome. Making mistakes isn't bad. Not correcting them is, and if you can avoid the obvious pitfalls in the first place, all the better. |
| Well you're both much smarter than me, and very helpful and generous with your time and advice. Thank you. Your suggestions have been immensely helpful, and have given me much food for thought. I've been turning the problem around in my head all night and I think I've come up with a stronger story as a consequence. I now need to let it marinate in its own juices for a day or two to see if holds together... |
| Why wait? Write a list of the key scenes, noting in one or two sentences (perhaps three) what happens in each. You should be able to see if it holds water from this list. It doesn't matter if you have to finesse this as you write the story, the basic trajectory of the arc is what counts. 1. Does the trajectory provide entertaining moments? (action, twists, turns and other surprises etc) 2. Does it arrive at where you want to be? If it satisfies both requirements, you're on to something. |
| Oooh, I'm getting really excited about this novel now. I think it's now considerably stronger than it was a week ago, and I'm really excited to begin writing it. Essentially I've got to start again from the beginning; there's little of my first draft's twenty thousand words that I can salvage for inclusion in this iteration of the book. So much has changed and evolved that to all intents and purposes it's a completely different book. I've written out all of the key scenes and I'm reasonably confident that there's rising tension, action, conflict and a few surprises along the way to the denoument. I think cause and effect seem in-character and credible. I hope all four of my main viewpoint characters are now strong enough to carry the story, and there are no weak 'filler' characters amongst my cast of POV characters. Mainly, I think it's time to stop vacillating and procrastinating and just get on with it. |
| I had to put my 70K first draft in a drawer and start over. Spent 3 months fleshing out my outline to Lakin's spec. Fixing to start the great re-write soon. Important lesson. Never get too attached to what you wrote :) |
| Congratulations. Procrastination is a writer's worst enemy. I have several books started that I just don't have the motivation to finish. Once my trilogy comes out, I won't have a choice. I'll be pressured to bring out more books. In a way, that's a good thing. lol. |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
