Young Writers Society

Hey. I'm new here.

At the moment I'm writing a book (just passed the 50,000 word mark with five chapters to go), and I've got into a habit of making observations at the beginning of every other (or thereabouts) chapter. I always make them relevant to the story, obviously, but I was just wondering if you think this is a good idea. I personally like it, but I think that some people may not. I've posted an excerpt below so you can see what I'm on about!



Thanks!

Hey, Jov, Alf here So, you like to make some hypothetical observations, eh? Well in my opinion, I think that it is a good idea. My question is, is the narrator of the story your first character? Inserting the first character's opinion or perspective can bring the readers more into the speaker's personality, qualities and beliefs. Not only that, it can help your readers understand what happens next. Some decisions of your characters can be based on the thesis statement, and thus, you can skip the explaining part

Although, your hypothesis may be right if you the narrator is you, the author. Some readers may take an awkward perspective of your way of writing, mostly because it's unique. From your excerpt, it seems more than an essay rather story. BUT in my opinion, this is also a good idea, you just need the READERS to get INCLINED to the way you write. What you can do if this is you situation is be open to them as the narrator. Or, you can bring the story to your eye, meaning you, the narrator/author, saw what happened and thus you tell the story.

Hope I helped

Your pal,
Alf

alfredsymon wrote:Hey, Jov, Alf here So, you like to make some hypothetical observations, eh? Well in my opinion, I think that it is a good idea. My question is, is the narrator of the story your first character? Inserting the first character's opinion or perspective can bring the readers more into the speaker's personality, qualities and beliefs. Not only that, it can help your readers understand what happens next. Some decisions of your characters can be based on the thesis statement, and thus, you can skip the explaining part

Although, your hypothesis may be right if you the narrator is you, the author. Some readers may take an awkward perspective of your way of writing, mostly because it's unique. From your excerpt, it seems more than an essay rather story. BUT in my opinion, this is also a good idea, you just need the READERS to get INCLINED to the way you write. What you can do if this is you situation is be open to them as the narrator. Or, you can bring the story to your eye, meaning you, the narrator/author, saw what happened and thus you tell the story.

Hope I helped

Your pal,
Alf

Thanks for your advice Alf!

Regarding your question, I'm the narrator as opposed to the character, but I see what you mean. I try to shy away from doing this a great deal as it distracts from the story, but at the same time I think it helps add extra depth to the book, and hopefully will make it more memorable!

And also, no, the narrator did not actually "see" the events unfold, even though there are comments about how the character is feeling and this is where these "hypothetical observations", as you call them, tie in to the events of the book.

Thanks again

Opposite viewpoint time!

I dislike it. The snippet in particular you gave feels preachy, with the moral of "don't lie, else you'll get into trouble!" Because the narrator is about to tell a story like that, we're almost positive the chapter is going to be all about proving the extra viewpoint right. You half redeem yourself by making it more "grey", showing that there's no such thing as black or white in practice, but in the end you still focus on how wrong it is to lie.

Part of the reason I dislike it is, I've noticed quotes at the beginning of the story that are simply there to make a comment on the story sum it up too neatly. The story begins to feel compartmentalized, and, worse, predictable. You can read the top of each chapter and know the general plot and how the story'll progress. Why I'm also against naming chapters— same thing happens.

I have seen it work, mind. But it was built into the framework of the story itself. The author made a true narrator who was telling the story to a bunch of village children. The group of children changes, so the story is told in a non-liniar fashion. Also, any lessons or morals he says fits his character. The narrator has a name, has discussions with the groups of children, and it's a sub story to the story he's telling. It's not neat, and it's not predictable.

That's my only caution against extra commentary. You have to be careful readers don't lose interest because you're giving them too much about the story in these "extra" bits, and people start guessing the plot too easily.

Rosey Unicorn wrote:Opposite viewpoint time!

I dislike it. The snippet in particular you gave feels preachy, with the moral of "don't lie, else you'll get into trouble!" Because the narrator is about to tell a story like that, we're almost positive the chapter is going to be all about proving the extra viewpoint right. You half redeem yourself by making it more "grey", showing that there's no such thing as black or white in practice, but in the end you still focus on how wrong it is to lie.

Part of the reason I dislike it is, I've noticed quotes at the beginning of the story that are simply there to make a comment on the story sum it up too neatly. The story begins to feel compartmentalized, and, worse, predictable. You can read the top of each chapter and know the general plot and how the story'll progress. Why I'm also against naming chapters— same thing happens.

I have seen it work, mind. But it was built into the framework of the story itself. The author made a true narrator who was telling the story to a bunch of village children. The group of children changes, so the story is told in a non-liniar fashion. Also, any lessons or morals he says fits his character. The narrator has a name, has discussions with the groups of children, and it's a sub story to the story he's telling. It's not neat, and it's not predictable.

That's my only caution against extra commentary. You have to be careful readers don't lose interest because you're giving them too much about the story in these "extra" bits, and people start guessing the plot too easily.

I'm sorry to disagree with you, but I think you have interpreted this wrong. The idea of these two paragraphs in particular is a way of poking fun of various themes that are prominent in today's society. It's also a way of harking back to an earlier time in the book where the characters, unlike they are now, were on earth. Sorry if I made that unclear in my writing, perhaps an edit is in order?

And as for your point about predictability - this passage is by no means an indicator of the chapter's overall theme. Well, at least not in the overall plot arc of the book - this lie turns out to be one of the best things this character's does, he just doesn't know it yet.

And, finally, as for the "neatness" issue you raised, that structure has always been very important to the book. The whole idea of the logically laid out structure is to contrast with the madness of the situation the characters are in, to reinforce themes that there's something all of them wish not to acknowledge, and if they could just convince themselves everything's fine by logical thinking then it all will be... But of course, it won't.

I suppose it was an error on my part to take this snippet out of context without a comprehensive explanation.

Thank you for your feedback

Yes, it is nigh on impossible to take things out of context and get any sort of correct answer. If you give chapter 1's observation, then it'd be easier.