So last week I was bitching and moaning about this book I read that sucked and that one of the things I found that made it suck was the main character and the fact that I just didn't care about her. Really. I was actually rooting for the bad guys to kill her.
But anyway, that wasn't the only thing I felt was "wrong" about the novel . . . and I use quotes because again, any novel written will never appeal to everyone, so this novel that I hated probably has a whole slew of people who loved it and, if I revealed what the actual book was, would hunt me down and kill me. But it wasn't a book for ME, so I read it and finished it looking for WHY it didn't appeal to me, and one reason was the main character.
But the other reason had much more to do with writing than that. I'm going to call it "form" because I can't find a better word for it, but it has to do with the structure and pace of a novel, and for me, it was all OFF in this novel, as if the book and I were on completely different rhythms at the time. So here's what I think about this elusive thing I'm calling FORM (but which likely has a much better name that I just can't think of):
Form
OK, every book is composed of scenes, all of which are supposed to connect together in a logical sense and move the reader along at a sufficient pace that they don't get bored and move on to a different book. I've already discussed pacing to some extent, but here I'm going to discuss pacing in terms of the ENTIRE BOOK, rather than the pacing of an individual scene, as I did before. I've also already talked about structure in scenes, but here I'm going to allude to the structure of the entire novel again. Both of those--structure and pacing of individual scenes--affect the structure and pacing of the book as a whole, and it's this that I felt destroyed the book I was reading. The structure and pacing of the scenes did NOT meld together well.
Think of it like a rollercoaster ride (which is not an original metaphor, I freely admit). In a novel, you expect to go on this ride, with its ups and downs, spirals and loops, but in the end the ride itself--no matter what strange bumps and twists are involved in the ride--is a SMOOTH ride. If the writer has done their job right anyway. You don't do a steady climb, with a wild, windy drop expected on the other side, reach the top, and then suddenly jolt into lull, as if the coaster track were once again at ground level. Such "discontinuities" in the ride just aren't fun. And they're jarring. Seriously jarring.
In a novel, the rollercoaster track is the lineup of the scenes. All of these scenes have a specific "weight"--meaning that some scenes have a significant effect on the plot or the characters, and some of them have a less significant effect (usually we think of these types of scenes as transition scenes, ones that move us from a significant scene to another significant scene). This disparity in the scene's weight in necessary because emotionally the reader probably can't take hopping from one horribly significant scene to another, and also because the plot can't retain it's logical sense by leaping from major plot point to major plot point. Readers need the less significant scenes so that they can take an emotional breather; and the plot needs the less significant scenes so that there is some logical connective tissue between major plot developments. So we've got scenes of varying weight. The significant scenes are the peaks in the rollercoaster, and the less significant scenes are the lulls or build-ups to those peaks.
When you're writing a novel, you have to put these scenes together in such a way that they form a nice smooth coherent track. You can't have a build-up that leads to a lull. A build-up needs to lead to a peak. Similarly, you can't have a peak that leads to another peak that leads to another peak, etc. What happened in the book I was reading was that the track formed by the scenes in the novel was not smooth. One reason it wasn't smooth was because the scenes themselves weren't laid out to form a smooth track, and the other reason was . . . well, more complicated.
The second idea that goes along with the "weight" of each scene is that when you write, you need to know what type of scene you're currently writing and give it the appropriate weight. If it's a transition scene, you shouldn't be using language that you'd be using for a heavyweight scene. This comes down to the details you use to describe the setting, the extent of the emotional content of the scene for the characters, and the amount of plot involved in the scene. If it's a transition scene, you may be spending more time on the setting and there may not be any indepth character development or plot involved. Whereas a heavyweight scene is probably fraught with deep, dark emotions for the characters and heavy plot twists. In essence, the weight of the scene is dependent on the balance of the three main components of the scene.
What I found so disconcerting about this novel that I felt was horrible was that the balance and the weights of the scenes were all off. I'd be reading a scene and the language the author used would indicate that this is supposed to be a heavyweight scene, that something horribly significant was going to happen . . . but by the end of the scene, nothing happened of any significance and I'd realize that the scene was actually supposed to be lightweight. There were problems in the other direction as well: a scene would seem to be lightweight--just a transition--when suddenly at the end some horribly significant thing would occur and I'd realize that in fact it was a heavyweight scene.
This disparity between lightweight and heavyweight scenes threw me completely off, and in the end was what really ruined the novel for me. Because a bad main character or a plot that wasn't well thought out isn't enough to make me completely hate a novel (or movie--think of all the movies with bad plots or bad acting that you still love) BUT bad writing . . . nothing can save bad writing. And that's what a jolting rollercoaster track and imbalanced scenes are: bad writing.
So, when you write, think about how the scenes in the novel fit together. Do they form a smooth, coherent track? Twists and loops and turns are fine, but they need to flow into one another, to take the reader along for the ride. And ask yourself, for each scene, whether you've given that scene the language and structure to give it the appropriate weight. If it's supposed to be a transition scene, make it lightweight; if it's a major turning point in the novel, it should be heavyweight. Both of these ideas are part of making the structure and the pacing of the novel work for the reader.
But anyway, that wasn't the only thing I felt was "wrong" about the novel . . . and I use quotes because again, any novel written will never appeal to everyone, so this novel that I hated probably has a whole slew of people who loved it and, if I revealed what the actual book was, would hunt me down and kill me. But it wasn't a book for ME, so I read it and finished it looking for WHY it didn't appeal to me, and one reason was the main character.
But the other reason had much more to do with writing than that. I'm going to call it "form" because I can't find a better word for it, but it has to do with the structure and pace of a novel, and for me, it was all OFF in this novel, as if the book and I were on completely different rhythms at the time. So here's what I think about this elusive thing I'm calling FORM (but which likely has a much better name that I just can't think of):
Form
OK, every book is composed of scenes, all of which are supposed to connect together in a logical sense and move the reader along at a sufficient pace that they don't get bored and move on to a different book. I've already discussed pacing to some extent, but here I'm going to discuss pacing in terms of the ENTIRE BOOK, rather than the pacing of an individual scene, as I did before. I've also already talked about structure in scenes, but here I'm going to allude to the structure of the entire novel again. Both of those--structure and pacing of individual scenes--affect the structure and pacing of the book as a whole, and it's this that I felt destroyed the book I was reading. The structure and pacing of the scenes did NOT meld together well.
Think of it like a rollercoaster ride (which is not an original metaphor, I freely admit). In a novel, you expect to go on this ride, with its ups and downs, spirals and loops, but in the end the ride itself--no matter what strange bumps and twists are involved in the ride--is a SMOOTH ride. If the writer has done their job right anyway. You don't do a steady climb, with a wild, windy drop expected on the other side, reach the top, and then suddenly jolt into lull, as if the coaster track were once again at ground level. Such "discontinuities" in the ride just aren't fun. And they're jarring. Seriously jarring.
In a novel, the rollercoaster track is the lineup of the scenes. All of these scenes have a specific "weight"--meaning that some scenes have a significant effect on the plot or the characters, and some of them have a less significant effect (usually we think of these types of scenes as transition scenes, ones that move us from a significant scene to another significant scene). This disparity in the scene's weight in necessary because emotionally the reader probably can't take hopping from one horribly significant scene to another, and also because the plot can't retain it's logical sense by leaping from major plot point to major plot point. Readers need the less significant scenes so that they can take an emotional breather; and the plot needs the less significant scenes so that there is some logical connective tissue between major plot developments. So we've got scenes of varying weight. The significant scenes are the peaks in the rollercoaster, and the less significant scenes are the lulls or build-ups to those peaks.
When you're writing a novel, you have to put these scenes together in such a way that they form a nice smooth coherent track. You can't have a build-up that leads to a lull. A build-up needs to lead to a peak. Similarly, you can't have a peak that leads to another peak that leads to another peak, etc. What happened in the book I was reading was that the track formed by the scenes in the novel was not smooth. One reason it wasn't smooth was because the scenes themselves weren't laid out to form a smooth track, and the other reason was . . . well, more complicated.
The second idea that goes along with the "weight" of each scene is that when you write, you need to know what type of scene you're currently writing and give it the appropriate weight. If it's a transition scene, you shouldn't be using language that you'd be using for a heavyweight scene. This comes down to the details you use to describe the setting, the extent of the emotional content of the scene for the characters, and the amount of plot involved in the scene. If it's a transition scene, you may be spending more time on the setting and there may not be any indepth character development or plot involved. Whereas a heavyweight scene is probably fraught with deep, dark emotions for the characters and heavy plot twists. In essence, the weight of the scene is dependent on the balance of the three main components of the scene.
What I found so disconcerting about this novel that I felt was horrible was that the balance and the weights of the scenes were all off. I'd be reading a scene and the language the author used would indicate that this is supposed to be a heavyweight scene, that something horribly significant was going to happen . . . but by the end of the scene, nothing happened of any significance and I'd realize that the scene was actually supposed to be lightweight. There were problems in the other direction as well: a scene would seem to be lightweight--just a transition--when suddenly at the end some horribly significant thing would occur and I'd realize that in fact it was a heavyweight scene.
This disparity between lightweight and heavyweight scenes threw me completely off, and in the end was what really ruined the novel for me. Because a bad main character or a plot that wasn't well thought out isn't enough to make me completely hate a novel (or movie--think of all the movies with bad plots or bad acting that you still love) BUT bad writing . . . nothing can save bad writing. And that's what a jolting rollercoaster track and imbalanced scenes are: bad writing.
So, when you write, think about how the scenes in the novel fit together. Do they form a smooth, coherent track? Twists and loops and turns are fine, but they need to flow into one another, to take the reader along for the ride. And ask yourself, for each scene, whether you've given that scene the language and structure to give it the appropriate weight. If it's supposed to be a transition scene, make it lightweight; if it's a major turning point in the novel, it should be heavyweight. Both of these ideas are part of making the structure and the pacing of the novel work for the reader.
