Units of Fiction I: Mechanics and Pacing
Aug. 24th, 2020 12:51 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
A discussion among my fellow writers of chapter length and where to break (or not) got me reflecting on how little writing advice there is for thinking about this -- and then from there I fell down a rabbit hole of realizing how even less advice there is for the sub-units below the chapter, the scene and the paragraph. (Or the higher-level units, the part or the book in a series . . . but that’s going to have to be a separate bit of pondering.)
This is stuff we’re apparently expected to learn by trial and error. You write stuff, and you notice -- somehow -- that breaking in certain places works better than others, and so you improve. Nobody ever really taught me how to think about these issues, beyond a few very basic mechanical points, and so as a consequence I’m not even sure how to articulate what it is that I do, even though I’m relatively pleased with how I’m doing it. This is the first in a series of posts that constitute an attempt to figure that out by talking through it out loud (so to speak), and I hope it will be of use to other people.
Note: what I have to say here is geared toward fiction writing, but certain aspects of it would apply to nonfiction as well, whether that be a blog post or an academic article.
Organizing it is a little bit hard, though, because I want to talk about all three of paragraphs, scenes, and chapters, and some of the points apply to all of them, but some don’t. Which means it’s not ideal to separate them, but it also isn’t ideal to tackle them all at once. I’m going to do a little from Column A, a little from Column B; I’ll start out with talking about the aspects where they’re the closely related, then break it up for where they diverge. Which also means this is going to be a multi-part discussion -- four parts in total, with one being posted each day. (Edited to add: Part II, Part III, Part IV.)
So with that context out of the way . . . in thinking about this, I’ve come around to the opinion that there are three major factors at play in how we decide to break up the units of our tale. Those are: mechanics, pacing, and attention. And of those three, I think attention is both the most subtle and the most important.
Mechanics are fairly straightforward. We probably all got taught that when you change speakers in your dialogue, you should start a new paragraph -- though even there, this rule can be bent. If all you’re doing is this:
Then you can probably get away with not separating them (though fussy purists will make faces at you).
Similarly, we probably all got taught that if you aren’t writing in a deliberately omniscient point of view, then you should put in a scene break when you switch perspectives. I fudged this one in my first published novel, because I had a scene where it was very right for the reader to see what was happening in the heads of both of the main characters, but that was a special case; by and large, failure to separate points of view gets labeled “head-hopping” and is seen as a bad thing. (Though I'll note that this, like everything to do with viewpoint, is purely an agreed-upon convention. As long as the reader doesn't get confused, there's no reason head-hopping couldn't be a valid technique -- and I believe in some corners of the fiction world, nobody bats an eyelash at it.)
Chapters are more flexible in this regard. The only mechanical constraints tend to be the ones you create for yourself: you don’t have to start a new chapter when you switch POV, but if that’s how you’ve done the first half of the book, there’s a bit of inertia pushing you to go on doing that. Only a bit, though; if you have a good reason to break that pattern, you can. A slightly stiffer constraint tends to be average length: if all of your chapters have been in the ballpark of four thousand words long, then one that’s only fifteen hundred or one that balloons up to seven thousand will feel out of place. But even then, sometimes you want that out-of-place feeling. I deliberately threw a very short chapter into the final book of the Memoirs of Lady Trent, in part to startle the reader.
I had other reasons for doing that, though. Which leads us into the next consideration here.
*
Pacing is something of an “eye of the beholder” deal. On the level of sentences, I’ve often seen the received wisdom that short sentences make the action seem faster, but my experience as a reader is that the opposite is true: since a period signals the end of a thought and a pause before the next sentence, lots of short sentences in a row make me feel like a choke-leash is jerking me to a halt every few words. I talked about this in Writing Fight Scenes:
Whereas longer sentences pull the reader along with less of a pause -- up to a point, at least. When the sentence gets so long and complex that the reader has to stop and reorient themselves before the end, you’ve gone too far. (Eighteenth-century English writers, I am looking at you.) I suspect this becomes very noticeable in audio, where the narrator is controlling the pace of delivery. Also, note that short sentences seriously limit your options for how they’re structured: when there’s only one or two clauses, you can’t provide much variety.
When it comes to paragraphs, scenes, and chapters, though, I can see a better argument for “short goes fast” -- again, up to a point. If every paragraph is a single sentence, I get the choke-leash effect once more. If every paragraph is the same length, then there’s no rhythmic variation, much like when every sentence is the same length. And I remember reading a book where the scene structure became absolute garbage, because the writer wasn’t thinking like a novelist. We were in the POV of a character clinging to the back of a truck while a monster attacked; then there was a scene break, followed by a single paragraph of POV from the driver of the truck, slamming on the brakes; then another scene break, and back to the guy clinging to the outside of the truck.
That isn’t prose fiction. That’s the author imagining the blockbuster movie they really hope someone will make out of their book.
But it’s true that if a scene is short, then the author isn’t leading us gently by the hand into the setting of the moment and exploring all the ramifications of what happens there. They’re getting in and out fast, hitting only the key elements in order to keep things moving forward. (Whether they’re doing so effectively is a separate question.) This can be a good thing to do as you reach a climactic section, and want the feeling of a fast-moving tale.
Similarly, short chapters serve a good purpose in luring the reader onward. The end of a chapter is a natural place to put a book down and take a break, but if each chapter is short, it’s easy to be tempted by the thought of just one more, because it won’t take long to read. On the other hand . . . the end of a chapter is a natural place to put a book down and take a break, so the more frequently those come, the more opportunities you’re offering the reader to walk away. They’re coming up for air, instead of staying immersed for longer periods of time. It’s a balancing act.
One which will probably be guided in part by what you’re writing. I haven’t done a statistical survey on this, but I wouldn’t be surprised in the slightest to find that thrillers, urban fantasy, and other such subgenres tend toward shorter chapters and scenes and even paragraphs, while (say) secondary world epic fantasy tends longer on all three fronts. Longer units give you more room to build stuff up, which is actively necessary when you need to orient your reader in an unfamiliar world. You can’t lean on reader familiarity as a shorthand, and incluing -- the delicate salting of exposition throughout the text, rather than dropping it in efficient but infodumpy wodges -- winds up requiring more words to pull off.
And that starts taking this in the direction of attention. Which is the point where I start needing to discuss paragraphs, scenes, and chapters individually, because what kind of attention you’re trying to manage and how best to do that becomes meaningfully different . . . different enough, in fact, that each of them will be getting its own post. For those, tune in for the next few days!
This is stuff we’re apparently expected to learn by trial and error. You write stuff, and you notice -- somehow -- that breaking in certain places works better than others, and so you improve. Nobody ever really taught me how to think about these issues, beyond a few very basic mechanical points, and so as a consequence I’m not even sure how to articulate what it is that I do, even though I’m relatively pleased with how I’m doing it. This is the first in a series of posts that constitute an attempt to figure that out by talking through it out loud (so to speak), and I hope it will be of use to other people.
Note: what I have to say here is geared toward fiction writing, but certain aspects of it would apply to nonfiction as well, whether that be a blog post or an academic article.
Organizing it is a little bit hard, though, because I want to talk about all three of paragraphs, scenes, and chapters, and some of the points apply to all of them, but some don’t. Which means it’s not ideal to separate them, but it also isn’t ideal to tackle them all at once. I’m going to do a little from Column A, a little from Column B; I’ll start out with talking about the aspects where they’re the closely related, then break it up for where they diverge. Which also means this is going to be a multi-part discussion -- four parts in total, with one being posted each day. (Edited to add: Part II, Part III, Part IV.)
So with that context out of the way . . . in thinking about this, I’ve come around to the opinion that there are three major factors at play in how we decide to break up the units of our tale. Those are: mechanics, pacing, and attention. And of those three, I think attention is both the most subtle and the most important.
Mechanics are fairly straightforward. We probably all got taught that when you change speakers in your dialogue, you should start a new paragraph -- though even there, this rule can be bent. If all you’re doing is this:
“Shall we?” I asked, and he said, “Let’s.”
Then you can probably get away with not separating them (though fussy purists will make faces at you).
Similarly, we probably all got taught that if you aren’t writing in a deliberately omniscient point of view, then you should put in a scene break when you switch perspectives. I fudged this one in my first published novel, because I had a scene where it was very right for the reader to see what was happening in the heads of both of the main characters, but that was a special case; by and large, failure to separate points of view gets labeled “head-hopping” and is seen as a bad thing. (Though I'll note that this, like everything to do with viewpoint, is purely an agreed-upon convention. As long as the reader doesn't get confused, there's no reason head-hopping couldn't be a valid technique -- and I believe in some corners of the fiction world, nobody bats an eyelash at it.)
Chapters are more flexible in this regard. The only mechanical constraints tend to be the ones you create for yourself: you don’t have to start a new chapter when you switch POV, but if that’s how you’ve done the first half of the book, there’s a bit of inertia pushing you to go on doing that. Only a bit, though; if you have a good reason to break that pattern, you can. A slightly stiffer constraint tends to be average length: if all of your chapters have been in the ballpark of four thousand words long, then one that’s only fifteen hundred or one that balloons up to seven thousand will feel out of place. But even then, sometimes you want that out-of-place feeling. I deliberately threw a very short chapter into the final book of the Memoirs of Lady Trent, in part to startle the reader.
I had other reasons for doing that, though. Which leads us into the next consideration here.
*
Pacing is something of an “eye of the beholder” deal. On the level of sentences, I’ve often seen the received wisdom that short sentences make the action seem faster, but my experience as a reader is that the opposite is true: since a period signals the end of a thought and a pause before the next sentence, lots of short sentences in a row make me feel like a choke-leash is jerking me to a halt every few words. I talked about this in Writing Fight Scenes:
Penthesilea charged at her enemy. She raised her sword. She chopped down at his head. He dodged. His sword cut along her side. She cried out in pain. Then she shoved him back with her shield. He stumbled. She ran him through.
Whereas longer sentences pull the reader along with less of a pause -- up to a point, at least. When the sentence gets so long and complex that the reader has to stop and reorient themselves before the end, you’ve gone too far. (Eighteenth-century English writers, I am looking at you.) I suspect this becomes very noticeable in audio, where the narrator is controlling the pace of delivery. Also, note that short sentences seriously limit your options for how they’re structured: when there’s only one or two clauses, you can’t provide much variety.
When it comes to paragraphs, scenes, and chapters, though, I can see a better argument for “short goes fast” -- again, up to a point. If every paragraph is a single sentence, I get the choke-leash effect once more. If every paragraph is the same length, then there’s no rhythmic variation, much like when every sentence is the same length. And I remember reading a book where the scene structure became absolute garbage, because the writer wasn’t thinking like a novelist. We were in the POV of a character clinging to the back of a truck while a monster attacked; then there was a scene break, followed by a single paragraph of POV from the driver of the truck, slamming on the brakes; then another scene break, and back to the guy clinging to the outside of the truck.
That isn’t prose fiction. That’s the author imagining the blockbuster movie they really hope someone will make out of their book.
But it’s true that if a scene is short, then the author isn’t leading us gently by the hand into the setting of the moment and exploring all the ramifications of what happens there. They’re getting in and out fast, hitting only the key elements in order to keep things moving forward. (Whether they’re doing so effectively is a separate question.) This can be a good thing to do as you reach a climactic section, and want the feeling of a fast-moving tale.
Similarly, short chapters serve a good purpose in luring the reader onward. The end of a chapter is a natural place to put a book down and take a break, but if each chapter is short, it’s easy to be tempted by the thought of just one more, because it won’t take long to read. On the other hand . . . the end of a chapter is a natural place to put a book down and take a break, so the more frequently those come, the more opportunities you’re offering the reader to walk away. They’re coming up for air, instead of staying immersed for longer periods of time. It’s a balancing act.
One which will probably be guided in part by what you’re writing. I haven’t done a statistical survey on this, but I wouldn’t be surprised in the slightest to find that thrillers, urban fantasy, and other such subgenres tend toward shorter chapters and scenes and even paragraphs, while (say) secondary world epic fantasy tends longer on all three fronts. Longer units give you more room to build stuff up, which is actively necessary when you need to orient your reader in an unfamiliar world. You can’t lean on reader familiarity as a shorthand, and incluing -- the delicate salting of exposition throughout the text, rather than dropping it in efficient but infodumpy wodges -- winds up requiring more words to pull off.
And that starts taking this in the direction of attention. Which is the point where I start needing to discuss paragraphs, scenes, and chapters individually, because what kind of attention you’re trying to manage and how best to do that becomes meaningfully different . . . different enough, in fact, that each of them will be getting its own post. For those, tune in for the next few days!
no subject
Date: 2020-08-24 08:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-24 10:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 01:04 am (UTC)Especially if you're, say, someone who is geared to end everything on a snappy line (thank you, Buffy Summers and Jack O'Neill, major influences in my life) and your betareaders end up starting to hate you for ending every damn scene on a snappy line, you may end up starting to reaaaaaly wonder about your choices in life.
Looking forward to the posts!
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 01:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 01:36 am (UTC)(I still love Jack O'Neill and Buffy Summers, though. I'm a sucker for a snappy line, but I try to put them maybe mid-scene.)
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 01:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 05:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 03:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 05:06 am (UTC)I'm also beginning to really wonder about the influence of screenwriting on prose fiction. I give the example above of that particular the rapid-cut pov switch, but I suspect there's also a fair number of authors who don't really know any way to lead into or out of a scene other than the screen-based way, which often tends to be "get right to the point, get out the instant it's done."
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 05:56 am (UTC)I can't say I love the effect of screenwriting on prose fiction, though I think that rapid-cut pov switch is more influenced by watching movies than by reading about how to write them. I do think there's a lot to be said about the way screenwriting and prose fiction work differently, though; a film can get away with a 30 minute fight scene, but a 30 page fight scene in a book is likely to be very dull, & etc.
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:06 am (UTC)And yes, I definitely meant that people are influenced by watching movies and TV more than by reading about them. Where the reading usually comes in is with Save the Cat and thinking everything has to be boiled down to the most basic and obvious three-act Hollywood structure. (It's almost to the point where I want to tell writers NOT to read that damn book.)
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 05:50 pm (UTC)In contrast, structure in fiction seems to have nearly infinite possibilities, unless someone's deliberately writing in a genre format, which doesn't tend to be as strict as screenwriting but as far as I can tell still depends on those narrative beats. I think you're right on that thrillers and other fast-paced books tend to have shorter chapters and even sentences. (Jonathan Kellerman, who writes that wildly popular long-running Alex Delaware series, sometimes almost lapses into sentence fragments. So does Stephen King.)
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:38 pm (UTC)(Jonathan Kellerman, who writes that wildly popular long-running Alex Delaware series, sometimes almost lapses into sentence fragments. So does Stephen King.)
Sentence fragments are great, when used right! One of the things I always tell my younger writing students is that while they should definitely pay attention to the grammar rules they're learning in school, for fiction, you often can and should break those rules for effect.
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:59 pm (UTC)(Yeah this is why I don't read how-to writing books, but I love writers writing essays about how they write. I learned most of what I mostly subconsciously know just from....reading a lot, which is also how I learned grammar: I know when something looks wrong, but not necessarily what The Specific Rule is.)
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 07:09 pm (UTC)Oh, there was a bit of that when I sat down to write these essays . . . <lol>
I have to confess I never really know what a "beat" is.
That's totally legit, because it can mean multiple different things! In addition to what you've said, when I took an acting class, our textbook defined it as "the period in which you pursue one objective until it is either won, lost, or interrupted" -- but that's a definition intended to be used within a single scene, where the "objective" might be as small as "get this other character's attention" before moving on to the objective "present my request." When people talk about it as a matter of large-scale pacing, they usually mean the croquet wickets the narrative ball needs to pass through along the path of a given type of plot, e.g. a romance needs the beat where the two romantic leads meet for the first time on the page, or one much later on where it looks like they will ~never be together~ (right before they are). There's a subset of writers who are very much helped by having "beat sheets" that help them pace out when they should be ticking off those boxes, which I think is why you hear the term a lot these days. Me, I find the concept of a beat sheet to a horrifying straitjacket, but that's fine; I know I'm somebody who intuits structure more than she builds it consciously. Different people need different approaches.
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 07:27 pm (UTC)OMFG YES I make MANY outlines, and they also never ever survive contact with
the enemythe actual writing process. I'm really character-driven and of the whole 'ACTION IS CHARACTER' school and trying to diagram it out like that just makes me totally freeze up. I kinda envy people who can get it to work though! And like you say, everyone's going to basically have their own approach. I just get resentful when the writing books make it sound like you must follow This One Thing, or you're doing it wrong. But writers talking about writing is usually full of personal process details and idiosyncratic tricks and I love those. Like Annie Dillard going to a conference room at her uni or something and spreading all the pages of her draft down one of those long tables, and walking around nad around it until her feet ached. Or Le Guin always drawing maps, even simple ones, or finding a "shape" for her books: spirals, circles, whatever. (Shirley Jackson always wrote on yellow paper -- right up until the final draft she turned in -- because that helped loosen her up. She wrote how it was always a shock to see the galleys, because the paper wasn't yellow anymore.)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 05:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 03:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 05:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-28 08:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 11:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 07:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 08:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 02:50 pm (UTC)I also agree that pacing isn't something I've ever seen taught, or explained, and while I feel it's one of my strengths (in my own writing, and also as something I can critique in others' writing) I really have no idea how it works systematically - it's an art and not a science for me - and so I'm super curious to see what you have to say about it!
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:43 pm (UTC)HECK YES. Also not starting too many sentences in close proximity with a participial or a prepositional phrase, or having too many "X, but Y" structures ("hmmm, can I make this one 'Although X, Y' instead?"), etc. I drive myself up the wall sometimes with that hyper-awareness.
I'm super curious to see what you have to say about it!
Pacing per se isn't something I talk about much more in this series; as you'll see with today's new post, the rest of it is more about controlling the reader's focus and attention. Lots of writing advice talks about pacing on the macro scale of the whole story and where key beats fall, but on the micro scale of something like paragraph length, I think I've hit all I really have to say. Anything else more or less gets demonstrated in what I write. :-)
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:45 pm (UTC)Clearly my writing needs improvement, as I meant on the macro scale, sorry for the lack of clarity!
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 05:07 pm (UTC)I know that I've read/studied something about the mechanics of pacing somewhere, not just learned from osmosis...just not sure where.
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:44 pm (UTC)As I mentioned in a comment above, there's a fair bit of advice about pacing . . . but 90% of it or more is focused on pacing the entire story, not the units that story is built out of.
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 07:29 pm (UTC)I don't know. Perhaps I picked up my awareness of sentence-level and paragraph-level pacing from reading John Steinbeck's journals when he was writing The Grapes of Wrath and East of Eden. Steinbeck was an early formative influence on me as a writer, and he would be a logical source for that sort of analysis.
no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 05:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2020-08-25 06:54 pm (UTC)