Diary Novel - Romance, Would you read it...

panda · Sep 29, 2009

I know traditional romances are mostly written in alternating 3rd person, (hero, heroine POV) or 1st, 3rd person (heroine POV). But I've been pondering/scribbling a romantic historical novel, and the character really wants to tell it in diary form lol.

I find epistolary to be too limiting in terms of interior thoughts. Because there is someone at the end of the letter to read your thoughts, so it has to somewhat self-edited.

So romance readers, would you read this format. The only other I can think of is in Contemp. Romance, Bridget Jones. And YA - Confessions of Georgia Nicholson.

Karen Junker · Sep 29, 2009

I don't see why this would be any different from reading a romance told in 1st person. It sounds interesting to me!

panda · Sep 29, 2009

Thanks! I think the diary format may help me to formalize my thoughts, help with tightening of plot, but yeah I suppose it is a different version of 1st person. I just haven't seen very many of these around.

JanDarby · Sep 29, 2009

Diary format is different from first person, in that it places an extra level of distance between the action and the reader.

With first person, there's a "story now," that, despite being in the past, feels like it's happening as we read it. With a diary, the reader is constantly aware that, no, these things happened earlier in the day (or the prior day), and all we've got now is the narrator's recollection. There are no stakes, no conflict.

For the diary to have any semblance of a real diary, it become all "tell" and virtually no "show." Most fiction today is heavily dialogue-dependent, and diaries tend to have, at most, brief snippets of dialogue.

Check out Bridget Jones's Diary. It's not actually told in diary format. Each chapter, IIRC, begins in diary format, but within a few paragraphs it segues into standard first-person narration.

In the romance genre, there's the additional negative that the vast majority of readers are allergic to first person too. Yes, there are exceptions, but most romances (outside YA and chick-lit) are third person.

JD

job · Sep 29, 2009

It does sound interesting. And lots of books have diary or letter components.

But -- ah. I see a poster above said this -- diary or letter format for the entirety of the story would be pretty much 'tell', wouldn't it?

If the POV character only describes what has happened, the reader may not feel she experiences it directly. She does not 'fall into the story.' She hears about it.

So diary format may present some challenges when it comes to building immediacy.

Casslyn Lazarus · Sep 29, 2009

Julia Quinn does a diary format in her lates I think. Check her website good luck.
Cass

Karen Junker · Sep 29, 2009

Good point about the immediacy. I guess I've always seen young girls' diaries where they include dialogue and write some of it in present tense.

panda · Sep 29, 2009

Check out Bridget Jones's Diary. It's not actually told in diary format. Each chapter, IIRC, begins in diary format, but within a few paragraphs it segues into standard first-person narration.

Yes, I mentioned Bridget earlier. It is really more a 1st person account, but even epistolary novels like Evelina also drift toward a more 1st person telling to get over the whole "showing vs telling" I believe the Georgia Nicholson book is in present tense, which adds more to the immediacy.

Casslyn Lazarus said:
Julia Quinn does a diary format in her lates I think. Check her website good luck.
Cass

Oh, you mean Miranda Cheevers, I liked that book and thought of it as well.

In the romance genre, there's the additional negative that the vast majority of readers are allergic to first person too. Yes, there are exceptions, but most romances (outside YA and chick-lit) are third person.

Yes, that is the crux. Do I write in a format no reader will read? What I've written so far probably falls under historical literary romance. I need an audience though, lol. I guess it is drifting more toward 1st person though with a diary lead-in.

veinglory · Sep 29, 2009

To be utterly honest, no I probably wouldn't read it. I want the immediacy of real time action. I don't mind the occassional letter added in (e.g. Chelsea Quinn Yarbro) but not in place of a direct narrative.

D.Avet · Sep 29, 2009

Man! I read a novel, a historical romance, in diary format. I can't remember what the name is now but I really enjoyed it and this was back before I actually read historicals. There were some elements towards the end that weren't in diary format. Then, Gena Showalter has a novel 'Animal Instincts' that's written in first person, but the last couple of chapters are diary entries if I remember right.

It would be tricky to keep it sufficiently interesting and paced, I would think. But if you can do it, more power to you.

panda · Sep 29, 2009

Thanks for the honesty, veinglory, would you be interested in reading first person novels or is it just the diary format that turns you off. I think I am just going to resign myself that my book will have a smaller market. I understand a lot of readers, in general, don't care for first person. I've always thought writing well is the most important thing, even though the narrative I'm writing in is quirky for lack of a better word (like obsolete, unpopular, etc lol).

Thanks, D. Avet, I'll check out your book rec.

veinglory · Sep 29, 2009

I read a lot of first person, especially saga and romance. But to me the diary format just feels less immediate and exciting than literally being in the person's head as things happen.

Irysangel · Sep 29, 2009

I read a diary historical a while back. The Secret Diaries of Josephine or something like that. It was really good, but it was 1) A historical and 2) Basically written as if it were 1st person POV but broken into dates.

girlyswot · Sep 29, 2009

JanDarby said:
There are no stakes, no conflict.

There can be. It depends wholly on the skill of the writer to show us the conflict as mediated through the diary, even when the writer of the diary isn't conscious of it. It's hard but in the hands of a great writer, it's brilliant.

For the diary to have any semblance of a real diary, it become all "tell" and virtually no "show."

Again, I disagree. You can 'show' a lot that isn't intended to be told in the writing of the diary. It's not quite a diary, but I'm thinking of the Amelia Peabody stories which are sort of written as a memoir. My favourite bits are always when it's clear that the narrator has completely misunderstood the events she is relating.

And, thinking about this a bit more, a diary is a great way to hint at things that happen off stage without having to 'tell' all about them. I really like this kind of writing as a reader - when you have to fill in the gaps and work things out for yourself without being spoonfed everything. I don't always want to 'experience' the action from within a character's head. I want to be told a story. Possibly this is one reason why I often prefer books written 100 years ago to many modern novels. I recently read The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society which is an epistolary novel and thus subject to some of the same limitations as the diary format and it was just delightful in every way. Lots of slow-build tension and conflict with just the right mix of things being told and things being referred to obliquely, and a lovely romance too.

I do agree that it would be a hard sell in the romance genre and that it takes enormous skill to pull it off. And probably I wouldn't recommend that the entire book be in the diary format. But diary writing doesn't have to be one-dimensional or unengaging.

veinglory · Sep 29, 2009

But it seems to me if it is a novel length 1st person just broken by dates it is a fantastically improbable diary?

panda · Sep 29, 2009

girlyswot said:
There can be. It depends wholly on the skill of the writer to show us the conflict as mediated through the diary, even when the writer of the diary isn't conscious of it.

I agree, without conflict, there is no novel. There is conflict in diary novels, it's just presented in a different format, journal might be a better word. But I think that's the trouble with diary-type novel, the immediate connotation is Dear Diary, Today I had cake, lol. A diary novel tells a story with plot, character, conflict, and all the good stuff that composes a novel but within the entries.

It's hard but in the hands of a great writer, it's brilliant.

Lol, only replace brilliant and great with novice.

Again, I disagree. You can 'show' a lot that isn't intended to be told in the writing of the diary. It's not quite a diary, but I'm thinking of the Amelia Peabody stories which are sort of written as a memoir. My favourite bits are always when it's clear that the narrator has completely misunderstood the events she is relating.

I didn't think of this, but there is definitely room for some irony and humor as well.

And, thinking about this a bit more, a diary is a great way to hint at things that happen off stage without having to 'tell' all about them. I really like this kind of writing as a reader - when you have to fill in the gaps and work things out for yourself without being spoonfed everything. I don't always want to 'experience' the action from within a character's head. I want to be told a story. Possibly this is one reason why I often prefer books written 100 years ago to many modern novels. I recently read The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society which is an epistolary novel and thus subject to some of the same limitations as the diary format and it was just delightful in every way. Lots of slow-build tension and conflict with just the right mix of things being told and things being referred to obliquely, and a lovely romance too.

Thnx for the insightful comment, girlyswot, I feel less like a waffling thing.

girlyswot · Sep 29, 2009

veinglory said:
But it seems to me if it is a novel length 1st person just broken by dates it is a fantastically improbable diary?

And that matters?

Almost all fiction is fantastically improbable (at least in the romance genre). What matters is making it plausible enough for the willing suspension of disbelief. There's no reason to suppose that a good enough writer couldn't achieve that in a diary format.

panda · Sep 29, 2009

girlyswot said:
And that matters?

Almost all fiction is fantastically improbable (at least in the romance genre). What matters is making it plausible enough for the willing suspension of disbelief. There's no reason to suppose that a good enough writer couldn't achieve that in a diary format.

Yes, agreed it is part of the whole suspension of disbelief thing, the same with epistolary novels.

Or even a frame story, a story told within a story, like Wuthering Heights. I remember contemporary critics kind of bashed the narrative it was told in from the maid's second hand accounts and the lodger finding Catherine's diary.

Aglaia · Sep 30, 2009

I don't necessarily agree that it's improbable. I, certainly, am a terrible diary writer, so mine would be like "I woke up. Er, done." But if you think about blogs, for example, those are more or less diaries for, what, 96% of people who write them and have no readers, right? And those are pretty detailed. I think it sort of depends on the character too. Some people write super long letters/emails that are drawn out stories of everything that happened to them that day. Others barely keep in touch.

At any rate, I agree with girlyswot, improbable or not, all fiction to some extent is, and the good stuff makes us forget it.

I'd give it a shot regardless. I love epistolary novels (Evelina's my fav), so I'm in!

panda · Sep 30, 2009

Aglaia said:
I don't necessarily agree that it's improbable. I, certainly, am a terrible diary writer, so mine would be like "I woke up. Er, done." But if you think about blogs, for example, those are more or less diaries for, what, 96% of people who write them and have no readers, right? And those are pretty detailed. I think it sort of depends on the character too. Some people write super long letters/emails that are drawn out stories of everything that happened to them that day. Others barely keep in touch.

At any rate, I agree with girlyswot, improbable or not, all fiction to some extent is, and the good stuff makes us forget it.

I'd give it a shot regardless. I love epistolary novels (Evelina's my fav), so I'm in!

That's my favorite epistolary novel and sort of the precursor to Austen. Evelina and Lord Orville forever, lol. :e2cloud9:

veinglory · Sep 30, 2009

girlyswot said:
And that matters?

I think it does. Fiction requires suspension of disbelief--and like any reader I will only suspend so far. It may be possible but your would have to be writing the next 'Flowers for Algenon' for the pretense to have a real role in making the story better (rather than tolerable) IMHO.

What does writing it as a diary add to this manuscript? It seems to me that even if you are of the position that it is not a failing, that is not really enough.

I am not saying it can't be done, but a "good enough" writer will have to be pretty damn good.

panda · Sep 30, 2009

Fiction requires suspension of disbelief--and like any reader I will only suspend so far

I still fail to see how diary-type format is such a terrible stretch of the imagination. There is an entire genre dedicated to Memoirs, but to each his/her own.

I am not saying it can't be done, but a "good enough" writer will have to be pretty damn good.

As good as Meg Cabot's Princess Diaries were I'm not sure I'd say it was the next Flowers for Algernon or as good as say the next Simone de Beauvior's The Woman Destroyed. A good novel is a good novel. I don't adhere to the argument that a novel has to somehow be exceedingly good just to flourish in its own genre. That is implied. Any novel is going to have to compete on its own artistic merit, regardless of the genre/format it is written in. Good writing transcends format and genre. The format is simply the vehicle, if you will, you still arrive at point B though. (And yes, some people hate riding in planes lol, which I guess would be akin to some people hating diary writing, 1st person, epistolary etc) If writer only conformed to 1st and 3rd storytelling, literature would be far less rich as a whole.

That said, you have a very material point. A lot of readers agree with you, if fact, a lot of readers don't even like 1st person, so I am going to do some serious thinking on narrative. Thnx for the input.

Madie · Oct 2, 2009

panda said:
I know traditional romances are mostly written in alternating 3rd person, (hero, heroine POV) or 1st, 3rd person (heroine POV). But I've been pondering/scribbling a romantic historical novel, and the character really wants to tell it in diary form lol.

I find epistolary to be too limiting in terms of interior thoughts. Because there is someone at the end of the letter to read your thoughts, so it has to somewhat self-edited.

So romance readers, would you read this format. The only other I can think of is in Contemp. Romance, Bridget Jones. And YA - Confessions of Georgia Nicholson.

I like to write in the diary format. It gives an interesting perspective to the story being told.

Diary Novel - Romance, Would you read it...

its harders sto type withh paaws

Live a little. Write a lot.

its harders sto type withh paaws

In the end, it's just you and the manuscript

Live a little. Write a lot.

its harders sto type withh paaws

volitare nequeo

Tripping the light Romantastically

its harders sto type withh paaws

volitare nequeo

She of Many Names

volitare nequeo

its harders sto type withh paaws

its harders sto type withh paaws

its harders sto type withh paaws

volitare nequeo

its harders sto type withh paaws