|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 6, 2008 22:34:17 GMT -5
So here's the deal. I have a link to Snow Globes, but you have to download it. It's a .doc file. This new version of Word that I have doesn't let me save stuff as .htm like I did with Spirit Saga and NeoSenshi, so I had to go with it. If I can figure something out I'll post an update, but until then you have to download it. I know that by doing this I'm putting it out there unprotected (except for my little "c" in a circle, as if that'll mean anything). All I ask is that you please don't distribute it (as if you'll want to anyway). I trust you guys. Don't let me down. So anyway, give it a read if you have the time. It's not long, it's 102 and a half pages. Feel free to post feedback here. Snow Globes Happy reading! -the smurf EDIT: Link removed. Sorry!
|
|
|
Post by dailycolbert on Sept 7, 2008 5:37:54 GMT -5
I tried and it says, "Sorry, the page you are looking for cannot be found." Do I need a certain program for it or something?
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 7, 2008 9:30:00 GMT -5
Dammit. No, you don't need a special program. Comcast is just not being cooperative anymore. I've had this problem a few times before with them, but now it seems to be happening every single time I try to do something. I'm currently at college right now, but I'll be going home in a week. My home computer has Word 2003 which lets me save a file as a .htm, which should let me post it directly to my website without downloading. So I guess I'll wait until then. If that doesn't work then I'll abandon Comcast and try something different. . -the smurf
|
|
|
Post by Dungeon Warden on Sept 7, 2008 13:36:02 GMT -5
You don't need Word to save text as an html document. Any .txt program (like notepad) will do. Just add .html (or .htm if you prefer) when you save the document and the file will be saved as an html file.
You can save files with any extension with notepad. I've created .php, .sys, .css, and other file types with notepad. Unlike other programs, notepad doesn't force you to use a particular extension when you save a file (although, it will default to .txt is you don't add one).
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 7, 2008 14:10:00 GMT -5
The problem with notepad is that I have to add tags for every paragraph, every italicized word, and every chapter heading. If I don't, it becomes one big wall of continuous text that gives me a headache just by looking at it. I could spend all that time adding the tags, or I could just wait until I get home and save it as a .htm and have the computer do all that hard work for me.
-the smurf
|
|
|
Post by Doan the Nado on Sept 7, 2008 17:03:37 GMT -5
The thing is, it's not actually that hard. For a paragraph break, just put <p>. For italics, put <i></i> around the italic text, for bold it's <b></b>. Of course, if you originally wrote the paper in Word, the export to HTML approach is better, but now you are beginning to see the downside of using Word.
I personally typically write mostly in plain-text, saving my files as ".txt". For paragraph breaks, I just leave an empty line. For emphasis (not used often), I *do this* (indicating bold), /this/ (indicating italics), or _this_ (indicating underline, or italics if you don't like //). In reality, I never use / /, very rarely use _ _, and occasionally use * *. If you do this, you can then simply put the .txt files online, and browsers will render them just as you see them. The only difference will be if your editor displays with word-wrap on and your browser does not.
For documents where the formatting is really important, I simply write in HTML. I keep an editor (not Word... Wordpad is sufficient but better tools are out there. I use vim, but it takes some learning, after which it is extremely fast to use) open to the raw HTML file, which I edit, and a browser opened to the same file, where I can refresh and see my changes. Learning enough HTML to format a document is a useful endeavor for just about anyone these days, and it will only take a decent cheat sheet (a reference to the various HTML tags) and about an hour to get the hang of it.
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 9, 2008 21:38:24 GMT -5
Oh, I know it's not hard to use tags, but it's a little more than a pain in the arse to add them to a 103-page Word document. I still remember the basics of HTML, so I think I might start using your suggestion of just typing stuff in HTML in notepad. My only question with that is, how do you know when to line break? I know notepad has the word wrap feature, but the displayed page won't. Is there an easy solution to that or is it simply fiddling with it until it works? Oh well. It should be up by Friday. -the smurf
|
|
|
Post by Doan the Nado on Sept 10, 2008 2:55:54 GMT -5
I think I might start using your suggestion of just typing stuff in HTML in notepad. My only question with that is, how do you know when to line break? I know notepad has the word wrap feature, but the displayed page won't. Is there an easy solution to that or is it simply fiddling with it until it works? If you're typing in HTML, the displayed page will definitely wrap. That's what HTML pages do. The only time you have to worry about word wrapping is if you're writing in plain text. But yeah, I can definitely understand you not wanting to add tags to an existing document by hand. My advice was mainly a suggestion for your future writing, so that you can avoid a dependence on a program like Word where there is a chance of losing access to your own documents. By the way, sorry for hijacking your topic. Feel free to delete these last 3 posts if you want.
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 15, 2008 19:02:51 GMT -5
All right. To hell with Comcast, I decided to go with scribd.com. The document is a private file, so only people who click the link will be able to see it. No download, it displays right on the screen. The scribd file is longer than my Word document; it looks like there are fewer words per page. The scribd file has 130 pages.
So, if you have some free time, give it a read. I would appreciate it very much. As always, comments are welcome.
Snow Globes
Happy reading for real this time!
-the smurf
EDIT: Link removed. Sorry!
|
|
|
Post by Dungeon Warden on Sept 15, 2008 22:00:37 GMT -5
I don't have time to read. Can you send me the text so I can convert it to an MP3? Read the words.com will convert any text file into an audio file using a variety of voices. The speech is a little robotic but is understandable. I've tried the site a few times and it works great.
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 16, 2008 20:59:18 GMT -5
Sure thing. Of course, I'll need your e-mail address. PM it to me if you don't want to post it.
I checked out the site ... that's really interesting. I think I may look into it myself, if only to see what it sounds like.
-the smurf
|
|
|
Post by Dungeon Warden on Sept 22, 2008 13:01:16 GMT -5
I listened to your story.
First of all, I have to say how impressed I am with your ability to write a story. The dialogue and character interactions were well written with a few emotionally powerful scenes. There seemed to be few spelling errors, if any (the conversion messes up with some words anyway, but there were a few times when a common word didn't translate and I wonder if it was because of a spelling error.)
The main problem I had was that there were too many point of view characters. I counted at least a half dozen and there may have been a few smaller parts as well. Short stories rarely have more then one point of view character. Two is usually the limit. Any more then that and the story starts to go off track as it often does here.
The whole story about Annabelle and the professor should have been it's own story. It completely interrupts the main story and the payoff at the end really doesn't justify it's existence. All the talk about mathematically formulas was boring.
The interweaving of the other stories worked for the most part, except when things seemed to happen for no reason. There is a part near the beginning when a boy attacks one of the main characters with the intent to harm her. The motivation for the attack is weak with little set up. The event itself lacked any real suspense, and the ramifications are over and done with soon after. The scene seems completely out of place in the story. You should either put it later in the story and do a bigger build toward the scene, thus making it a major climax in the story, or get rid of it all together.
Speaking of climaxes. There wasn't one. This is just a story about a bunch of stuff happening to a bunch of people and how they deal with it. There is a general theme of being trapped in your life but there is no real emotional impact. The various endings feeling forced, like you had an ending in mind but didn't know how to get to it. You just put them in to finish the story without any real connection to anything that happened before.
I don't what to go into detail here, but the way the manager deals with his problems just doesn't work. I can see the story building toward this conclusion but there is no pay off. He finally decides to take action. The end. Very disappointing.
The story of the boy and girl who want to escape their destiny and take charge of their own lives also feels rushed at the end. Things start out slowly. A bunch of stuff happens. At first the stuff is mostly bad, but then some good stuff happens. The end. There is only two ways this story could have ended. You chose the happy ending which is fine but without a climax to suggest that a bad ending is even possible the ending loses any impact. It just happens. There is a scene near the end that does throw some doubt that the ending might be happy but it lacks power. If this doubt had been running through the whole story and the climax brought all the doubt together in one big tearful scene, then it could be a powerful thing. Here, it just feels like one more low point in a story full of them.
I can see a lot of potential for a novel here, or perhaps three separate short stories. If you rework the plot to build toward a climax and put the characters into real danger you might have something here. I like the story telling in general I just feel it needs a more focused plot. Overall, I give it a B-
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2008 14:07:38 GMT -5
I like how it has a theme.
I also like how eloquent you are.
Although, it was confusing since (like DW said) you have so many different point of view characters. I ended up skimming and reading all/almost all of one character at a time instead of reading it all in the order that it is written in.
Either way, me likes what me sees.
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 22, 2008 14:29:07 GMT -5
First of all, I have to say how impressed I am with your ability to write a story. The dialogue and character interactions were well written with a few emotionally powerful scenes. There seemed to be few spelling errors, if any (the conversion messes up with some words anyway, but there were a few times when a common word didn't translate and I wonder if it was because of a spelling error.) Thank you. As for the spelling errors, there was only one that I found after my umpteenth proofreading, and I can't remember if I fixed it before sending it to you. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure spell checker got everything. The main problem I had was that there were too many point of view characters. I counted at least a half dozen and there may have been a few smaller parts as well. Short stories rarely have more then one point of view character. Two is usually the limit. Any more then that and the story starts to go off track as it often does here. The whole story about Annabelle and the professor should have been it's own story. It completely interrupts the main story and the payoff at the end really doesn't justify it's existence. All the talk about mathematically formulas was boring. Okay. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "go off track." Personally I thought it was necessary to use the various points of view, since there was no single main character. I'm not one to strictly adhere to the accepted formula, and overall I thought the progression of the story worked. I would love to hear specific examples of what you mean, though, whether by posting them here or PMing me. As for Abigail and Dr. Clayton, I felt that they were absolutely necessary. The events in which they are involved are few enough that I don't think they interrupt the plotline. Overall, however, they events around them are not meant to be about them, if you get what I mean (tough to put into words...). They are really an extension of Anne Clayton, and their actions and events are meant to affect her as a character, fueling her motivation and pushing her in the direction in which she ultimately goes. As for Dr. Clayton's lessons being boring, that was the point. If I made the class enjoyable, interactive, and fun it would have been completely out of place. The snow globe concept goes far beyond Middletown. Clayton's class is a facsimile of Middletown, and as such it is seen in the same light. The interweaving of the other stories worked for the most part, except when things seemed to happen for no reason. There is a part near the beginning when a boy attacks one of the main characters with the intent to harm her. The motivation for the attack is weak with little set up. The event itself lacked any real suspense, and the ramifications are over and done with soon after. The scene seems completely out of place in the story. You should either put it later in the story and do a bigger build toward the scene, thus making it a major climax in the story, or get rid of it all together. Well, I've never been a master of suspense. I tried my best in that department. Anyway, again I thought that the event (though not necessarily the scene itself) was integral to the plot. Eric Clayton is not an important character, but his actions affect not only Claire and her motivation, but also Anne and her motivation. Events such as this are meant to build the characters; it creates a huge conflict in Claire's mind that haunts her throughout the story, and it affects Anne's psyche as well which manifests itself through the various psychological scenes of hers. I can agree that the build up beforehand may not have been fully established, though I thought his reason was simple enough: he's an addict who's out of a job and got kicked out of his house because he was insubordinate at work, and when Tom told him who was "responsible" he decided to get revenge. It's possible that I could add a scene that shows him more fully before the attack, but that's probably the most I could do without making it seem out of place. Speaking of climaxes. There wasn't one. This is just a story about a bunch of stuff happening to a bunch of people and how they deal with it. There is a general theme of being trapped in your life but there is no real emotional impact. The various endings feeling forced, like you had an ending in mind but didn't know how to get to it. You just put them in to finish the story without any real connection to anything that happened before. I don't what to go into detail here, but the way the manager deals with his problems just doesn't work. I can see the story building toward this conclusion but there is no pay off. He finally decides to take action. The end. Very disappointing. The story of the boy and girl who want to escape their destiny and take charge of their own lives also feels rushed at the end. Things start out slowly. A bunch of stuff happens. At first the stuff is mostly bad, but then some good stuff happens. The end. There is only two ways this story could have ended. You chose the happy ending which is fine but without a climax to suggest that a bad ending is even possible the ending loses any impact. It just happens. There is a scene near the end that does throw some doubt that the ending might be happy but it lacks power. If this doubt had been running through the whole story and the climax brought all the doubt together in one big tearful scene, then it could be a powerful thing. Here, it just feels like one more low point in a story full of them. To be honest, I don't agree. I feel like the endings for each character were completely appropriate and I can't imagine any other ending working. Without going into detail, Tom Holmes's ending was alluded to from the very first chapter, and it fits his "story" like a glove. In his case it was a battle between him and Middletown, and Middletown won. Why? Because he conceded from the very beginning. All the events that happened to him led up to it. Instead of looking at the glass as being half full, he did the opposite. Everything that happened to him convinced him that his flawed logic was correct, and in the end this was the only way he could have faced it. There was no alternative; things couldn't suddenly have inspired him to take action, it would have been out of character and against everything that had happened since the start. Anne Clayton was searching for her direction from the very beginning, through literature, through magazines, through her paintings. Her battle with Middletown ended in a stalemate, because neither would make a move. All of the events that happened to her cleared her vision, and ultimately allowed her to find her way. Of all the endings, hers was the one I got asked about the most by those in my family who read it, and yes, she simply stands up and walks away. Anne said in Chapter 9 (I think) that (paraphrasing here) she was not one to take action, and that she knew she would never be happy for that reason. She understood, in talking to Claire, that her battle was meaningless, and her final decision was to just stop fighting. Her ending is more symbolic than literal in this way. Any other action, again, would have been out of character. As for the sappy Hollywood ending where the two lovebirds live happily ever after, it makes sense. It was not the original ending. The original idea was that Alex leaves Claire behind. However, this actually went against the main theme of the story, so I changed it. However, I do agree that there could have been more of a "climax" where the reader could believe that the original ending might be true. The scene in the park that opens Chapter 10 was literally the most difficult scene to write, and I still feel that it is lacking a bit. One remedy I thought of was to make Alex voice his thoughts from the scene where Tom Holmes haunts his conscience, and have an actual discussion with Claire about it. I can't think of any other way to make it "bigger," so to speak. I do think, however, that the "doubt" was present for a long time throughout the story. It wasn't obvious from the beginning, but every time Alex thought about choosing between Claire and music he fed into this doubt. The conversations with Tom Holmes fed into it. The initial hesitation about whether he was right in trying to make a career out of his music fed into it. The continued lack of confidence that he expressed throughout, et cetera et cetera. But I do agree that it could peak in a more emotional way. I'll try to rework that scene. Thank you for taking the time to listen and give feedback. It really means a lot. I really want to try and make this the best that it can be without sacrificing anything to do it. I appreciate your comments and critiques, and will certainly take them to heart. -the smurf edit: Sorry Will, I didn't see your post in the half-hour it took me to assemble mine. Thanks for the input. I find your method of reading it interesting, too. Unfortunately as the author I can't really experiment with different ways of reading it as I already know everything about it, but I'd be curious to see what it would be like to read a character at a time.
|
|
raithwall
RPGM2 Helper
The World I know
Posts: 222
|
Post by raithwall on Sept 22, 2008 19:28:56 GMT -5
Keep in mind the more POV characters you have the less intimately the reader relates to any of them. A good story must succeed in making the reader care about the protagonist. As an author you know everything so its easy to fall into the trap of making an omniscient story, but when you do this the reader is forced to take on the role of himself reading a book, which is never a better role then immersing yourself in the world of the protagonist. Those are the kind of stories that really get off the ground and are read for hours without even realizing it. Theres a difference between writing a story and writing what you know. For example which sounds more appealing: You have a guy whose the main character and this girl whose mostly shy and silent. You decide to make her a POV character and show all sorts of scenes from her past. The reader gets to know her, but he no longer relates to the main character, who doesn't know her and assumes shes just some silent girl. The reader either knows the difference and becomes less intimately involved or assumes the main character knows it too and makes a lapse in judgement that probably makes the main character seem like an insensitive jerk. OR You stay in the POV of the main character and need to make scenes where he actually gets to know the shy and silent girl and she either tells him her past or someone else does. If this is a romance novel it is clearly better to learn things about the girl at the same time the guy does. The romance that is based on the scenes is better then the romance based on awkwardly attaching two POV characters in an incredibly mundane way. If no one but the reader knows about these scenes how are they even significant to the story? It comes off as dressing up a mundane story. This is of course more challenging to a writer, but makes for a much more interesting course of events. Having a character tell their story to the main character allows you to keep a few scenes and retain a single POV. This is okay in small doses. "The reader is easy to surprise and manipulate when forced into the subjective corners of the protagonist. The reader who becomes above all characters also becomes above reading the story." This is where I like fantasy where you can have a magic crystal ball and actually see these scenes from afar. Doing this is fine in small doses because the story goes on assuming the main character knows which means there is no contradiction between the readers understanding and the main characters understanding, but this should not be used as a writing tool. Its okay to use it if you have a crystal ball already there for story reasons, but its not a good idea to add one because you can't think of another way to make a scene. That being said its okay to have a few POV characters, just be aware that it does divide the readers interest and create interference to relating with the main character. Although, it was confusing since (like DW said) you have so many different point of view characters. I ended up skimming and reading all/almost all of one character at a time instead of reading it all in the order that it is written in. This is what works best with books where you need to use your imagination. If every character is POV then you might as well just make 13 versions of the same story, each told through their perspective. It seems he would've been happier doing that. I made this mistake once. I was told that third person omniscient was only used the victorian days and that no publisher would ever accept a work that has no main character and every character is POV. I could've reworked it, but I abandoned it when Science learned that galaxies and the universe are expanding at a rapid rate, because this work explored the idea of the universe folding back in on itself. Uroboros was a time travel story that sought to relate the universe to the Uroboros snake (self creating and self destroying) and attach it in a circle from beginning to end. It was also a romance story because the guy accidentally destroys the whole universe, then it begins from start and he crashes where he originally found the ship, dies, is judged but escapes and merges with himself. His past experiences occur like a dream and his conclusion was that God or fate allowed the entire universe to die just to show him the path to finding love. With TV its the other way around. On the TV its good to be watching every little scene. TV doesn't require imagination therefore there is no need to change perspective. Your a guy on the couch watching it, nothing else. If this is your cup of tea then I suggest writing a screenplay. Games can kinda go both ways. As long as the game is fun it won't be a big deal. Look at how fun FF6 was and it was loaded with different POV characters. My game uses a single protagonist. Third person is standard because its a story unfolding. First person does a better job at creating intimacy, but the story needs to take on a reality of its own, such as an account written by the protagonist about his life, and it becomes obvious the protagonist will live to write this account of his story. So here you are trading suspense for intimacy. Anyways I haven't read your story and I'm by no means an expert. Just something to think about...
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 22, 2008 20:52:46 GMT -5
I completely agree with what you're saying, raithwall, on the condition that there is a single main character. With Snow Globes, however, there is not a single main character. There are four. The other option is to not regard time and lump scenes together by character which would make the timeline seem choppy and incoherent. As I said to DW, I would like examples. As the author, it all makes sense to me, so I can't put myself in the position of reader. The only way I can make it better is to get the full perspective of the reader. I don't want lectures, I want practical advice that relates to the story itself. Otherwise, I would have started a thread asking for writing advice. However, I disagree that shifting POV is detrimental to storywriting. Actually, if you were to ask my 12th grade English teacher, he would say the exact opposite. Omniscient shifting selective is just another style out there, and it has been used with much success. James Joyce and Ayn Rand have mastered the technique. Ulysses is a continual back and forth shifting perspective between Leopold Bloom and Stephen Dedalus (though to be fair, that book is seriously CRAZY), Dubliners shows events through a ton of different characters with different stories to each, though many stories have multiple character perspectives within them. Rand's novels are formatted similarly to Snow Globes, using shifting perspectives between many of the main characters involved. Atlas Shrugged is probably the closest related in that sense, and as a reader I did not find it difficult at all to relate to many of the characters. Of course, James Joyce and Ayn Rand were professional writers who were AMAZING at what they did. I am not comparing myself to either of them. However, if I ever dream to do so, I need useful criticism to make it happen. Shifting perspective is completely legit, I just need feedback on how to hone my style and make it work better. I'm not going to just throw it out because I'm not perfect at it. Making generalizations about writing style never works because every single person is different and ever single person does different things in different ways. James Joyce revolutionized literature with his incredibly risky experiments and new ideas. To say that his style can't work because you don't become attached to the characters due to shifting perspective or because you get wrapped up in the thoughts of the characters and can't get a feel for who they are outside of their own heads is simply wrong. Joyce's style works flawlessly if you interperet it. My goal is to reach that level, but I can't do it if I'm told not to use my style because it can't work. I'll make it work, dammit! I just need constructive feedback to get it going. I've considered sending the story to my old English teacher to look over, and I'm thinking it's probably a good idea. Also, I apologize if it seems like I'm angry or anything. I'm not. Tone of voice simply does not translate through the internet. I've tried to use smilies to denote that I'm just talking. -the smurf
|
|
|
Post by Dungeon Warden on Sept 23, 2008 11:52:15 GMT -5
This is what I was afraid of when The POV started to change. You have no concept of story formula and instead of learning the proper way to write you avoid formula altogether. As a result all your arguments as to why you wrote the story the way you did fall flat. Yes, your reasons are valid; however, the way to put those ideas on paper are not. There are much better ways to write this story, the most important being to pick one main character and sticking with them. It's not about all the information being in the story somewhere, it's about telling the story in the most effect way to get the point across.
You must know the rules in order to break them. Until you understand why the formulas exist and use them, you can never fully understand how to write a story and know when you can push the limits. This story is a perfect example of how an otherwise excellent writer can be his own worst enemy. If you want to be a writer, then learn to write. Once you have all the formulas memorized and know how to use them properly, then you can try to experiment with point of view, interweaving story lines, or any other strange story design concepts.
A wise man once said "if you write a truly original story no one will want to read it." This is because people have a specific way of processing information and interacting with the world. Anything that is alien to that process is hard to deal with. The formulas are really the smoothest paths to travel. They are ways to relay information that is easy to digest. Writing against formula is like asking someone to travel a rocky road or to eat something bitter. Unless you know how to show people the safest path to travel or add something sweet to the recipe, people are going to struggle with the process and most will give up when the going gets too hard.
Again I want to say you are an excellent writer. Several of the scenes in the story were very powerful and worked within the story as a whole. Ultimately, it is the lack of a proper formula that causes the story to fail. If you just want to write for your own enjoyment, then go right ahead. However, if you want other people to like what you've written you need to learn how to tell the story in a way that people can enjoy. It's your choice, but I hope you don't waste your talents trying to do things your own way.
P.S. I can't be specific with any examples because there is nothing wrong with the story details. It's the overall package that needs fixing, not any specific detail. It's writing advice that you need so that's what I've given you. Take it or leave it. It's your choice.
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 23, 2008 13:40:32 GMT -5
I see what you're saying. I guess the most obvious option here would be to divide the story into three parts, part one being Tom Holmes, part two being Anne Clayton, and part three being Alexander Clemens. In each part I would have all the scenes involving the "main" character for that part, either left alone or edited to the perspective of that character depending on the scene. Will's response actually made this idea more intriguing. The only issue I have is the timeline of events. Doing this would basically involve reading the same timeline three times. Though each story would be different, many of the events would overlap and be shown from different perspectives. Would this be a hinderance? I would not have a problem restructuring the story this way; as I said, it is an interesting angle from my viewpoint as the author. The story simply cannot be told explicitly through one character, so this seems to be the best option. Other than the scene at the start of Chapter 10 that needs to be reworked anyway there would be few scenes that would need to be rewritten. Characters like Claire, Abigail, Maria, and Charles could be viewed solely from Tom, Anne, or Alex's viewpoints depending on the part. The only issue with this is that there are a few Claire-centered scenes that may not entirely fit into any of the parts, such as the opening to Chapter 6, but she doesn't have enough scenes to warrant her own section. But I digress. I can figure out the nitty-gritty details later if this is the option I choose. I guess the real question is: is this the best option? Or is there a better one that I'm being too narrow-minded to see? I think restructuring it this way has a lot of potential, but then again that's what I thought about the original structure, too. Opinions? -the smurf
|
|
|
Post by Doan the Nado on Sept 23, 2008 16:01:35 GMT -5
This last option sounds quite interesting. As long as each character has some unique events and repeated events have completely different viewpoints, revisiting the same timeline multiple times is not a problem at all. I think this could be a very effective approach. I have not yet read your story, so if you do take this approach, I can read it with a fresh perspective.
It seems to me that the hardest thing in this instance would be determining what order the parts should go in. Obviously, if one person's timeline begins or concludes before another's, theirs should probably come first, but then again, this is a property that you can manipulate. Depending on the overall feeling you want the reader to take away from your story, you have to determine how you want the story as a whole to end. This is actually an advantage because it allows for things like including a happy ending while also allowing the reader to come away from the entire with a completely different feeling, like the danger of hopelessness.
Another point to consider is to ensure that the more important characters get a longer and/or more developed chunk of the story. I think it's perfectly fine to have a character's POV for only one or two chapters before switching to another character (never to return to the original one); that technique can offer a fresh (perhaps even warped) perspective on a situation while not lingering too long in the view of someone who isn't that important.
For an example, if you've seen City of Angels, consider if the majority of the movie, up until the final bike ride, was told from Meg Ryan's character's perspective. We get all the exposition where she is being affected by Nicolas Cage, she thinks she's going to marry someone, decides not to, and then Nicolas Cage shows up on her doorstep. There's the romantic scene, we're with her the next day as she goes out to get fresh fruits and everything, and her story ends on a beautiful day as she is happily riding back home.
Then we abruptly shift to a completely different perspective. It is still dark as Jim is waking up to his blaring alarm clock. He is groggy and still sore from helping his brother roof his house the evening before, but a cup of coffee is enough to get him going. He calls in to the dispatching service to find out where his truck is needed today, and he has to head somewhere out in the country to pick up a load of spring water from the local distiller. It's a beautiful drive into the sunrise, and he has some exciting plans for the weekend. [Interaction with people at distillery, etc.] On his way back into town, to the water distributing company, he is enjoying the scenery as he rounds the corner to find someone bicycling, and he cannot avoid hitting her. The scene continues as he tries to get her help, and then Jim's story ends as she dies.
The perspective then switches to Nicolas Cage and we're back at the very beginning, with some new scenes (the ones he's in without her), some similar scenes from different perspectives (instead of her feeling like she's being watched but not feeling scared about it, we're instead with Nicolas Cage actually watching her), some identical scenes with different emotions attached (the romance scenes), and of course the ending for Nicolas Cage is completely different from that of Meg Ryan.
With Meg Ryan's story, we ended on a high note of making a good decision and being happy about it, enjoying the beautiful day. With the truck driver, we see that accidents happen, and no matter how good of a person you are, bad things happen for senseless reasons. With Cage, we get the classic, "I would rather have had one breath of her hair, one kiss of her mouth, one touch of her hand, than an eternity without it. One."
Of course, that's not exactly how City of Angels actually went, but it's one example of the kind of technique I had in mind. Having a short chapter or two about a minor character can serve to change the tone, introduce the reader to the motivations of someone that they would otherwise consider to simply be a bad person (a truck driver who killed the main character), and relate important points of the plot that are impossible or difficult to tell from a more major character's perspective (the main character's death).
But do remember that it's important to leave as much as necessary on the cutting room floor. It's easy to get married to a particular character and want to leave him or her in the story even though they don't do much to further the story's aims. Just remember that there are other days and more stories to be written, and just because you cut someone out of this one doesn't mean that they can't show up in another story. And of course, there's always the advice that your work is done not when there's nothing left to add, but when there's nothing left to take away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 23, 2008 18:55:46 GMT -5
I agree with Doan completely.
I know it can work too because Suikoden 3 did it quite well. It even made me decide to do it with Tried and True 2. In the end, most people liked Suikoden 3's "Trinity Site System." (Most of the people who didn't like Suikoden 3, you can tell from the reviews at gamefaqs, are fans of Suikoden 2 that didn't want any change and had really great expectations.)
I can send you the full script for Tried and True 2 if you'd like to see how a story can turn out when done that way for free and/or you could play Suikoden 3. And I have one small and strange tip: it may actually be a good idea to write a few lines for the characters in the shared scenes out of character. For example, when Wilson fights Mel in Tried and True 2, Mel says some things to make her sound cold and uncaring even though, as the reader could tell from her story, she's the opposite of that. It gives the player a different idea of how the character is and makes them wonder "How could this cold bitch be one of the good guys?" I know it's a strange tip. Of course if you weren't using the "Trinity Site System," I wouldn't be recommending this.
|
|
raithwall
RPGM2 Helper
The World I know
Posts: 222
|
Post by raithwall on Sept 23, 2008 20:53:39 GMT -5
It can be done, and you can have 4 POV characters, 4 stories going on at once but joined as one. I have no problem enjoying this format in a video game or television, but it can get confusing and anti-climatic in a book. Whats ultimately important is that the content is good and people want to read it and are drawn in. You need to put a lot of emphasis on the beginning and the synopsis. These are the critical moments where the reader decides to start reading or put it back on the shelf. This needs to begin with getting the reader to love or hate a single character. This character is the protagonist. Other POV characters may come along, but the original agreement to read was made because of this character. So in a way its impossible to proceed without having a main character. Each scene must have a single POV character to focus the readers imagination. You can't just weave a whole story together and list one characters thoughts and feelings and then anothers in the next paragraph. This is called third person omniscient and is considered unacceptable. It makes the reader very aware their reading a book and prevents them from connecting with it. You can give other characters their own scenes, but keep in mind each time you do you interrupt focus on one character and shift it to another. For me this interruption is when I stop reading for the night and pick it up tomorrow. So yeah avoid doing too much of that. Some readers may even resent your progression of scenes and skip ahead to the ones they want to read, I,E, poopiness. You say you can't imagine yourself as the reader, but I bet you can to some extent. You have to pretend to be completely ignorant of the story and replace the natural love you have for it as a writer with a pessimistic attitude. If worst comes to worst put it down and forget about it for a few years. I've done this a few times and come back to some of the older stuff I've written and was like "what the heck was I thinking?" These were all stories I turned into DND sessions. I'm actually not a huge reader, in fact the only story book I can remember reading from start to finish outside of books I read for school is "The Exploits of Ebenezvm" by Craig Shaw Gardner. A funny story about an old Wizard who becomes allergic to magic and must go an adventure to find the nose hair of a demon to cure him. The story is told entirely in the POV of his young apprentice Wuntvor. It will make you laugh and glue you to the story. You'll read for hours and not even be aware you were reading a book. Humor makes for a very powerful reading incentive IMO. In my own project "Visions of the Godwar" I begin with a single chapter in the POV of the main characters father, then do the rest of the book in the main character. He does get to see these scenes and become aware of them later, but I must begin the main story with the short story of what happened with his father. He is the one who jumpstarts the entire premise of the story, but he dies and its all about his son now. I'm not sure if I should call it chapter 1, introduction, or a seperately named short story in the same book that occurs before the main story. I admit the story has a lot of action and if I could make it as episodes of Anime that would be a dream come true. Anyways, I'm not insulting you or saying you need to change anything, I'm just sharing my perspective. I'm sorry if any of it came off as insensitive. I've been in the same boat so I know whats it like. I've decided to proceed differently, but if you can make it your way then more power to ya and best of luck. In fact the reason I decided to post here again was to argue on your behalf, and this is the result of about an hour of thought. Also, when you have established yourself as a successful author you can get away with more. You may wish to check out the first works of the authors you mentioned and the time frame of their publication. Your first work needs to be well written, needs to be a good story, and needs to appear it will be sucessful. Yes it can be hard. Edgar Allan Poe, once of our greatest writers now taught in schools, was completely rejected by Traditional Publishers. John Grisham had to sell books out of his car. I think a screenplay might be a good format for you. It can be read like a book, is already formatted for television, and because of this is okay for the reader to imagine it as seeing a movie rather then being in a point of view, but I admit I don't really know much about screenplays. Ultimately only you can decide whats best: Should you keep it as it is, should you rework it, should you start with a different story, should you make a screenplay, should you make it into a game, only you know...
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Sept 26, 2008 11:49:47 GMT -5
All right then, that's what I'll do. Thanks for all the input, guys.
-the smurf
|
|
|
Post by The Smurf on Oct 7, 2008 22:28:45 GMT -5
I uploaded the revised version. I separated the story into three parts: Thomas Holmes, Anne Clayton, and Alexander Clemens & Claire Bryant. I also rewrote the scene I said I was going to rewrite. Again, as the author, I don't really know if it flows or makes sense necessarily since I know the story, but I think it turned out well. I also included the original version. As a result, the scribd document is 250 pages. The actual Word document is only 112, 221 if you include the original version.
So yeah, read away. I'll fix all the links to go to the updated version.
Snow Globes
Happy Reading Again!
-the smurf
EDIT: Link removed. Sorry!
|
|