I am finding myself consistently inclined to write in little sections, almost like vignettes. I get into a scene, and then I feel this urge to end it after only a page or sometimes less. Right now I solve this by putting little lines of asterisks after each "section." Part of me feels that this is evidence of rookie writing and that eventually I'll learn to transition and/or elaborate more, and the other part of me feels that maybe this is just how my book will be? As I type that sentence though, the reader in me rails that I would never read a book that choppy. Maybe I'm rushing the scene? So far I've allowed myself to continue on this way, but I'd welcome any feedback.
REALLY short chapters/sections
- Thread starter Smirkin
- Start date
- Status
I have this habit as well 
Thing is we all write differently, so you might chop up your story a little more than what's considered normal, but if it still works, you shouldn't worry about it.
Now, if you think you are writing far too "choppy" and the scenes are indeed rushed and could be longer, I'd advise you to think on the snowflake method. Lay the bare bones first, add meat and fat as you please after. Since my own story is SciFi and fatty details are very important to set the mood to the readers, I found out that writing down the rough action of the scene and then adding the more detailed descriptions, monologues and actions is so much better than trying to write a complex, detailed scene in the first try.
Good luck
Thing is we all write differently, so you might chop up your story a little more than what's considered normal, but if it still works, you shouldn't worry about it.
Now, if you think you are writing far too "choppy" and the scenes are indeed rushed and could be longer, I'd advise you to think on the snowflake method. Lay the bare bones first, add meat and fat as you please after. Since my own story is SciFi and fatty details are very important to set the mood to the readers, I found out that writing down the rough action of the scene and then adding the more detailed descriptions, monologues and actions is so much better than trying to write a complex, detailed scene in the first try.
Good luck
Certainly James Patterson is a rookie with his short chapters.
Really, I wouldn't know how it works out for you. I don't know your writing.
A beta reader could tell you better than I.
Really, I wouldn't know how it works out for you. I don't know your writing.
A beta reader could tell you better than I.
Some of James Ellroy's later stuff has chapters that are very short, some of them only a few lines. The effect works for him, but as WillSauger said it depends on whether it works for you and your writing. The genre can come into, too. Where I've seen it done most effectively is crime. But you want to make sure you're not actually cutting things too short. Pared right back is fine, stripped to the bone can sometimes work even better, but you don't want the reader to feel like they're reading something written in fast-forward.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2012
- Messages
- 231
- Reaction score
- 22
- Location
- Virginia, USA
- Website
- catchingadragon.com
Certainly even among readers, whether or not a scene is rushed is a subjective thing, having a lot to do with a reader's preferences and a writer's personal style.
Do you feel like a scene might be rushed just because it's short? It could just be that not much happens during that scene. Maybe two characters need to talk and that's it. Or does it feel rushed because the pace feels too quick and character experiences (descriptions) are being glossed over?
In my opinion, moving the story forward is certainly more important than overdosing on descriptions and atmosphere for their own sake, because it's the story (character goals, conflicts, resolutions) that makes descriptions interesting; descriptions don't make a story. But even so, the descriptiveness and story pacing of a writer will be a stylistic decisions; some writers will do more, some less, and some readers will prefer more, some less.
Do you feel like a scene might be rushed just because it's short? It could just be that not much happens during that scene. Maybe two characters need to talk and that's it. Or does it feel rushed because the pace feels too quick and character experiences (descriptions) are being glossed over?
In my opinion, moving the story forward is certainly more important than overdosing on descriptions and atmosphere for their own sake, because it's the story (character goals, conflicts, resolutions) that makes descriptions interesting; descriptions don't make a story. But even so, the descriptiveness and story pacing of a writer will be a stylistic decisions; some writers will do more, some less, and some readers will prefer more, some less.
I have this habit as well
Thing is we all write differently, so you might chop up your story a little more than what's considered normal, but if it still works, you shouldn't worry about it.
This is really good advice. I think the important thing to do is figure out if you're writing short chapters because you feel rushed or are just trying to get a draft on paper, or is it because that's just how the story is coming together?
Something that might help you to figure this out is to take one chapter and really take your time with it. Try to make it as long as you possibly can, just to see what's hiding between the lines. It might help you to go into more depth, or it might feel clunky. Then again it might not even help at all! Just something that's worked for me in the past since I'm inclined to speed through chapters as well on a first draft.
Where are you in the writing process? When I was writing my first draft I just wrote wrote wrote, delineated my sections with asterisks as I went, and then jumped back and filled in the blanks during my second draft. After I wrote the second draft I went through and determined where my chapter breaks occurred based on the action occurring in my scenes.
As others have said - do what fits your writing best. If you publish a good story, nobody's going to go through and say, "It would have been better if the chapters were shorter/longer."
As others have said - do what fits your writing best. If you publish a good story, nobody's going to go through and say, "It would have been better if the chapters were shorter/longer."
Thanks all. I am reworking an old project, so it is partly a rewrite, but mostly feels like a first draft as I'm discarding a lot and keeping primarily the characters and some of the plot points.
I am starting to notice a trend here on AW....or perhaps I am discovering a truth you've all been trying to help me see, which is that ultimately I need to just write and trust the process. So thanks again, I feel more and more legit with every conversation I have on this board.
I am starting to notice a trend here on AW....or perhaps I am discovering a truth you've all been trying to help me see, which is that ultimately I need to just write and trust the process. So thanks again, I feel more and more legit with every conversation I have on this board.
Personally I don't see a big problem in it. Perhaps this is because I do it often (haha). But I find it to be okay because I believe less is often more as far as conveying meaning is concerned. If you've said all you need to say, I say end it there. It can add to pace and provide emphasis.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2011
- Messages
- 5,783
- Reaction score
- 1,693
- Location
- Left of center
- Website
- kkelliewriteme.wordpress.com
Reading The Road right now. McCarthy writes short vignettes within a larger context - a cold night, a dip in a freezing pond. He makes no apologies for that. It doesn't bug me because I'm getting a sense of this story, this mc, these thoughts as he struggles to survive in this new Hell, as he tries to keep his kid alive and teach him everything, before. . .
That's McCarthy's vision and that's how he chose to tell it. It felt right for him to go that route, as it were. The question for you is, does it feel right or does it feel like you're giving your story short shrift? Does it feel cohesive, or disjointed? The fact that you started this thread tells me you have doubts as to its efficacy. (Well, that and the fact that you wrote,
Have you posted anything on SYW? That might be something to consider. You could post 1K or so, ask for feedback relative to what you're wondering here. Meanwhile, I'd say keep writing. You may find down the line that your vignettes could be explored, deepened, made more cohesive by adding expository passages. . .
Or you may find that this is how you do it, Smirken.
That's McCarthy's vision and that's how he chose to tell it. It felt right for him to go that route, as it were. The question for you is, does it feel right or does it feel like you're giving your story short shrift? Does it feel cohesive, or disjointed? The fact that you started this thread tells me you have doubts as to its efficacy. (Well, that and the fact that you wrote,
Have you posted anything on SYW? That might be something to consider. You could post 1K or so, ask for feedback relative to what you're wondering here. Meanwhile, I'd say keep writing. You may find down the line that your vignettes could be explored, deepened, made more cohesive by adding expository passages. . .
Or you may find that this is how you do it, Smirken.
Last edited:
In general, readers always hate short chapters, but as a writer you need to be the one to decide on the flow of your narrative.
If a short chapter works for you, then by all means use it.
If a short chapter works for you, then by all means use it.
I wouldn't have a problem with having a one sentence chapter in one of my works - if it was relevant.
My current WIP has a really short first chapter (I'm reluctant to call it a prologue) that has no direct bearing on any of the specifics of my novel's characters/storyline.
I'm using it to set the tone of my novel and entice the reader in and therefore it doesn't need to be very long at all.
My current WIP has a really short first chapter (I'm reluctant to call it a prologue) that has no direct bearing on any of the specifics of my novel's characters/storyline.
I'm using it to set the tone of my novel and entice the reader in and therefore it doesn't need to be very long at all.
Cite, please.
Because last I checked, Patterson and Dan Brown, among many others, were doing just fine, thank you very much.
Unsupportable nonsense. It's not hard to find all manner of books in every genre that have some, or all, short chapters.
caw
I agree with Willie and Blacbird. I don't find dislike of short chapters to be a general attitude among readers.
I like them. I write them. When I edit, I recommend shortening them more often than stretching them out.
I write a chapter as long as it takes for that particular scene or event to take place. I have had chapters that were just 2 pages long, and I've had some that were 15-20 pages long. It just depends on what you need in that chapter to get it done..
both
What section of SYW? I'd be happy to look as well.
It's in Literary SYW, thanks!
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2011
- Messages
- 5,783
- Reaction score
- 1,693
- Location
- Left of center
- Website
- kkelliewriteme.wordpress.com
yes, it's Charlotte - you can see the short sections more in post 5 where I put the first two pages.
I have just finished reading a series called "The Maze Runner", and all 4 books have very short chapters ranging from 200 words to 2,000. While it helps drags the reader in by introducing a cliffhanger at the end of nearly every chapter (roughly 70 per book), at the same time it can affect the pacing of the story.
The characters can end up staying in the same room, talking for 5 chapters. In the same way, the characters can get from one place to another, miles away, in a few sentences.
Short sections can work out, but maybe it would be worth collecting the sections that are relevant to each other and merging them into a chapter. It's what I would do in your shoes.
Hope it helps
The characters can end up staying in the same room, talking for 5 chapters. In the same way, the characters can get from one place to another, miles away, in a few sentences.
Short sections can work out, but maybe it would be worth collecting the sections that are relevant to each other and merging them into a chapter. It's what I would do in your shoes.
Hope it helps
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
- Messages
- 1,793
- Reaction score
- 232
- Location
- Grumpyville
- Website
- imablogginghorse.blogspot.com
The only thing I have to add to this is, there's no wrong answer when it comes to how long or short a section/chapter should be.
- Status