Do you think most people prefer reading a story that follows a single arc, like following the main character from beginning to end. Or do you think people prefer where there are multiple story arcs going on at the same time and have places where they cross and, ultimately, converge.I guess the answer might be that whatever the story calls for is what should be done.The reason i ask is that in my current WIP, DIE AGAIN, i have like two different arcs going on that will most certainly cross and cross very soon. I am trying to decide if it is going to read better to take out the arc and instead of having another character follow it i would weave it into the arc i have my main character following. I am a huge Jack Reacher fan and Barry Eisler, too. Their stories follow the arcs and lives of just the main characters as they follow the threads and pull the story together.What do you guys think?
WHAT DO YOU THINK MOST PEOPLE PREFER .....
- Thread starter GavinPreacher
- Start date
- Status
Honestly, for the purposes of your book, it doesn't really matter what any of us think. Go with what works best for you. Who knows, you may wind up doing something new that everyone in 10 years will be going "Coooool" over.
That being said, I happen to really like multi-arc books like you're describing. Half the fun for me is when the arcs intersect and I get that "AWESOME" revelation moment.
That being said, I happen to really like multi-arc books like you're describing. Half the fun for me is when the arcs intersect and I get that "AWESOME" revelation moment.
Lower case. 
Single arc, multiple arcs, it all depends on the story and how it can be told most compellingly. The proof is in the whole pudding, not the ingredients, I'm afraid, so pre-judgment is difficult if not impossible to do.
Single arc, multiple arcs, it all depends on the story and how it can be told most compellingly. The proof is in the whole pudding, not the ingredients, I'm afraid, so pre-judgment is difficult if not impossible to do.
I've gone both ways and it does depend on the story. I have a survival story much like Robisnon Crusoe that lends it'self well to single POV and one continuous arc. Linear all the way through. I admit to being nervous at the simplicity of it.
But I do love to write these massive tomes with multiple POVs and numerous subplots (seperate chapters), and converge all of it at the end for a sweeping finale. Editors and agent do love "layering", and appropriet subplots. King does a lot of this, and does it well. It's difficult to pull off, but I've been practicing a lot, and writing several books this way.
Tri
But I do love to write these massive tomes with multiple POVs and numerous subplots (seperate chapters), and converge all of it at the end for a sweeping finale. Editors and agent do love "layering", and appropriet subplots. King does a lot of this, and does it well. It's difficult to pull off, but I've been practicing a lot, and writing several books this way.
Tri
It depends what the author does well. Some authors begin a series with a single storyline, and then it branches in subsequent books. It takes more talent IMO to do multiple storylines. But I like those books the best when the author pulls it off.
I've always admired an author who can contain all the detail in his/her brain required to write multiple story arcs, and also bring them together in a way that makes me go, "Wow."
There is a certain level of skill required I think to keeping those arcs intersecting without colliding, as well as making it clear and simple what all these separate things have to say that belong in a single story.
I know of several authors who write omniscient 3rd very well (not that that POV is necessary to have multiple story arcs), bringing together a plethora of characters into a single theme which centers around one main character. I find that to be an admirable skill.
There is a certain level of skill required I think to keeping those arcs intersecting without colliding, as well as making it clear and simple what all these separate things have to say that belong in a single story.
I know of several authors who write omniscient 3rd very well (not that that POV is necessary to have multiple story arcs), bringing together a plethora of characters into a single theme which centers around one main character. I find that to be an admirable skill.
It depends what story you want to tell. If the two arcs do connect in a way that goes wow, then go for it. But if you have two characters and you want to tell two stories with some minor crossovers, then it might not be so wow. Or if those stories are pretty much telling the same story, just from two different perspectives. (Impossible to say without knowing more of course).
The multiple character arcs that I've always enjoyed have been ones where the story was interlinked and you needed to see the various sides to get the bigger picture. They had other POVs because you could not tell the story without them.
The multiple character arcs that I've always enjoyed have been ones where the story was interlinked and you needed to see the various sides to get the bigger picture. They had other POVs because you could not tell the story without them.
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2009
- Messages
- 530
- Reaction score
- 59
I agree that you should do whatever you're comfortable with.
I love stories with multiple arcs, especially when at first I can't see how they could possibly relate. Dean Koontz's From the Corner of His Eye was like that- 3 POV's, I couldn't even imagine how he was going to tie them all together until halfway through the book. Loved it.
I love stories with multiple arcs, especially when at first I can't see how they could possibly relate. Dean Koontz's From the Corner of His Eye was like that- 3 POV's, I couldn't even imagine how he was going to tie them all together until halfway through the book. Loved it.
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2007
- Messages
- 738
- Reaction score
- 85
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Website
- vrabinec-fred.blogspot.com
Your story will dictate which you choose. I'm working on two manuscrips right now. The first is a scifi which is very straight forward, one primary plot with just minor sub plots, told 75% in the MC's POV. I could do that because the action happens around him, and even my other primary characters are always close by. In my other one, a historic war epic in which I felt the need to show each side's underlying motives, I have 3 plot lines told by 7 POV characters in the first 8 chapters which is necessary until the plot lines converge not quite halfway through the book, at which point it whittles down to 3 main POV's and 2 plot lines. The plots don't converge into one plot line until the last five or six chapters.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 43,746
- Reaction score
- 8,654
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Website
- www.amazon.com
Whatever your story calls for.
In The Pacific Between, I have a single arc. One protagonist/narrator.
In my WIP, I have two arcs. Two main characters.
If you were writing Lord of the Rings, you might find yourself writing multiple arcs with a cast of thousands.
Do whatever makes sense, man.
In The Pacific Between, I have a single arc. One protagonist/narrator.
In my WIP, I have two arcs. Two main characters.
If you were writing Lord of the Rings, you might find yourself writing multiple arcs with a cast of thousands.
Do whatever makes sense, man.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2009
- Messages
- 409
- Reaction score
- 25
I'm all about the strong single MC arc, with two or three subplot arcs that interweave toward the end.
Anything goes, if the result is enjoyable.
The Tesseract by Alex Garland is one of those multi-layered, different-characters-on-a-collision-course stories that immediately comes to mind.
The Tesseract by Alex Garland is one of those multi-layered, different-characters-on-a-collision-course stories that immediately comes to mind.
Well i persoanlly like both. My own story starts out with a single story arc and then as the series goes on the characters start to separate and it turns into multiple story-arcs
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2008
- Messages
- 2,557
- Reaction score
- 571
- Location
- SE Michigan
- Website
- www.bofexler.blogspot.com
I like both, but it depends on the story an how it's handled. I've read some stories where the subplot was boring and disctracting, even though it came together at the end in a decent way. I've read some stories where I felt frustrated with the single arc since there was just too much that the narrator didn't know and it drove me nuts.
Go with what works for you and your story. I'm a linear thinker and I tend to focus on just one character, arc. I can write obliquely about things that happen with other characters, but find that I'm not real good at writing their plots in the narrative. So I just stick with my one MC.
Go with what works for you and your story. I'm a linear thinker and I tend to focus on just one character, arc. I can write obliquely about things that happen with other characters, but find that I'm not real good at writing their plots in the narrative. So I just stick with my one MC.
I have to agree tell your story your way. Don't try and format yourself to what you think people want. It will never happen and you'll drive yourself insane. It's your book. Do what you want.
I think most people prefer stories with one main arc and several related sub arcs that culminate into a stunning conclusion. I'm using Harry Potter's massive success for this conclusion.
Don't think about what the reader wants. Write what YOU want. Tell the story YOU want to tell. Never lower yourself to what the masses want. Challenge the reader.
- Status