swan_tower: (*writing)
[personal profile] swan_tower
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:

“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!

Date: 2020-08-24 08:03 pm (UTC)
yhlee: Alto clef and whole note (middle C). (Default)
From: [personal profile] yhlee
I have come across one book that talks about this sort of thing analytically in the context of essay writing, which is Joseph Williams' Style. Don't have my copy anymore, though.

Date: 2020-08-25 01:04 am (UTC)
havocthecat: the lady of shalott (Default)
From: [personal profile] havocthecat
Why, yes. Yes, you're just supposed to know how to break all these things. There's a lot about writing you're just supposed to osmose. I mean, I read a lot, but it's hard to dissect paragraph, scene, and chapter length.

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!

Date: 2020-08-25 01:36 am (UTC)
havocthecat: the lady of shalott (Default)
From: [personal profile] havocthecat
Which is a thing that makes a WHOLE LOT OF SENSE, actually! But oh my gosh, do I wish my former betareaders had the words to explain why the ends of my scenes didn't work. I did finally figure it out after a lot of struggling, but I sometimes still struggle on HOW to end a scene these days.

(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.)

Date: 2020-08-25 05:54 pm (UTC)
kore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] kore
One of the big clues I first got re pacing was from reading a biography of Mary Renault, which emphasized how in her early writing, scenes just sort of went on and on because she had no idea how to structure them. She then worked out she didn't have to show everything, that time jumps and summaries and so on were fine. She called this insight "the bound" after miraculous escapes in old boys' adventure stories: "And with a bound, Jack was free of his bonds!" That really opened up the possibility of transitions to me.

Date: 2020-08-25 06:34 pm (UTC)
kore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] kore
Oh, that's great! I hadn't heard of "leaping and lingering" before ever, I love it.

Date: 2020-08-25 03:05 am (UTC)
thawrecka: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thawrecka
I tend to see more advice about this in screenwriting guides and screenwriting influenced prose writing guides, and there's also Jordan Rosenfeld's Make A Scene out from Writer's Digest. But it's definitely not the most harped on of subjects.

Date: 2020-08-25 05:56 am (UTC)
thawrecka: (Cher and a messy pile of clothes)
From: [personal profile] thawrecka
Different screenwriting manuals talk about it differently. (I bought most of mine when I was studying screenwriting at uni, but I know at a bunch of romance writing conferences people have given talks recommending one screenwriting manual or the other: usually Save the Cat or something by Robert McKee).

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.

Date: 2020-08-25 06:11 am (UTC)
thawrecka: (Default)
From: [personal profile] thawrecka
Save the Cat is definitely overrated, even as a screenwriting manual. Its formula works well with fewer genres than people think, and I often watch movies obviously structured by its rules that are nonetheless very dull. I've definitely told people not to read it.

Date: 2020-08-25 05:50 pm (UTC)
kore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] kore
Just a few scattered thoughts....From what I dimly remember, screenwriting tends to lean heavily on the structure of three (or four) acts: setup, rising action, TWIST in act II, obstacle, disaster, denouement/resolution, &c &c. I haven't read Save the Cat but the MCU movies are good examples of conventional screenwriting storytelling. With the Avengers (2012), you have the opening exposition setting up the initial Macguffin and drawing them all together, the rising action of fighting Loki, TWIST when Coulson dies and there's an even bigger threat on the horizon of the space invasion, team comes all together now for the final fight, heroes win! hurrah. Writing for US movies is really formulaic and strict, writing for US TV even moreso. (William Gibson compared writing his X-Files episode to being assigned a sonnet.) Joss Whedon also used the structure of 1) established group has conflict 2) group is torn apart by so-called "Little Bad," estrangement ensues 3) group rallies to fight off "Big Bad" repeatedly in his TV shows, especially Buffy. I don't think a lot of people study screenplays on their own, but a lot of writers have absorbed the grammar of screenwriting from TV and movies.

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.)

Date: 2020-08-25 06:59 pm (UTC)
kore: (Anatomy of Melancholy)
From: [personal profile] kore
I have to confess I never really know what a "beat" is. (I tend to avoid modern how-to-write books because I am afraid of having the centipede problem. When I played piano I learned by ear, lol.) In screenwriting it seems to mean "a moment," like in older screenplays I've read it goes like this: "KIRK: (A beat.) Do you know what that means, Bones?" Or "Beat. Beat" when the writer wants to indicate that the actors should pause to build the emotional tension. But then "beats" are also individual units of scenes (kind of like atoms?) or the "point" of scenes, like you hit certain beats in action scenes, or in screenplay acts or sequences. That seems to borrow something from music -- they talk about missing beats, or off beats, or whatever. "Beat" seems to mean "Thing that happens?" idk. "Natasha realizes how they can close the portal." "Dr Strange looks at Tony and holds up one finger." I guess I really don't think of plots that incrementally, much less how to deliberately arrange little bits in sequence that way (which is also why I suck at plotting).

(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.)

Date: 2020-08-25 07:27 pm (UTC)
kore: (Jane Eyre - Jane writing)
From: [personal profile] kore
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

OMFG YES I make MANY outlines, and they also never ever survive contact with the enemy the 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.)

Date: 2020-08-25 05:55 pm (UTC)
kore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] kore
(Aww, Writer's Digest....I had those Writer's Market books for decades, couldn't bring myself to throw them out.)

Date: 2020-08-25 03:56 am (UTC)
marycatelli: (Default)
From: [personal profile] marycatelli
It was years ago, but I still remember realizing that you should put the dialog with the action tag, not break and then put the next character's action tag in the same paragraph and breaking for the next character's dialog. . . .

Date: 2020-08-28 08:38 pm (UTC)
green_knight: (Writing)
From: [personal profile] green_knight
Me, I wrote paragraphs of dialogue - keeping things together that logically belonged together, and then breaking for the next logical unit. It took me a while to realise that no, every unit of dialogue (one person speaking and doing something) needs to be its own paragraph, and I still struggle with characters wanting to talk or do stuff for several paragraphs.

Date: 2020-08-25 11:59 am (UTC)
nancylebov: (green leaves)
From: [personal profile] nancylebov
How public is this intended to be? I'd like to share it on facebook, but I don't know whether you'd want it there.

Date: 2020-08-25 07:59 pm (UTC)
nancylebov: (green leaves)
From: [personal profile] nancylebov
I linked to there and here, sinse here has more comments.

Date: 2020-08-25 02:50 pm (UTC)
isis: (Default)
From: [personal profile] isis
Hi, here via [personal profile] yhlee (though of course we've bumped into each other before). I am so with you on the need to mix it up with regard to sentence length - actually, I'm a big fan of mixing it up with regard to pretty much every aspect of writing, like for example, varying whether dialogue tags are at the front, middle, or end of sentences, implied through action, or missing entirely.

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!

Date: 2020-08-25 06:45 pm (UTC)
isis: (Default)
From: [personal profile] isis

Clearly my writing needs improvement, as I meant on the macro scale, sorry for the lack of clarity!

Date: 2020-08-25 05:07 pm (UTC)
jreynoldsward: (Default)
From: [personal profile] jreynoldsward
I took an online class with James Gunn which addressed this a little bit. In his The Science of Science Fiction Writing, he discussed the scene as the smallest dramatic unit. The class got into the mechanics of pacing but not all that deep.

I know that I've read/studied something about the mechanics of pacing somewhere, not just learned from osmosis...just not sure where.

Date: 2020-08-25 07:29 pm (UTC)
jreynoldsward: (Default)
From: [personal profile] jreynoldsward
I think a lot of it may well go back to the basics of writing instruction in k-12 education (full disclosure--former middle school special education teacher here, and my Master's Degree project focused on remedial writing. This was my specialty as I worked with students who had learning disabilities). Paragraph construction at that level is very sketchy, and to keep student focus from wandering the concept of the five sentence paragraph was heavily emphasized. It has a purpose, but too many k-12 teachers are themselves intimidated by writing to move beyond that particular structure. I know I found it frustrating at times because I could see creative reasons for the bad example paragraphs...but trying to bring that up to students at that level would have been confusing.

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.

Date: 2020-08-25 05:50 pm (UTC)
kore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] kore
Ursula Le Guin has some good thoughts about pacing, especially re LOTR and the Jackson movies, in Wave in the Mind, I think, and IIRC her Steering the Craft does too (I haven't read it in a long while). Shirley Jackson's lectures on fiction writing have really good and detailed advice on sentence length and building suspense.

Date: 2020-08-25 06:54 pm (UTC)
kore: (Default)
From: [personal profile] kore
Ooh Jeanne Cavellos! We've got her Babylon 5 books.

Profile

swan_tower: (Default)
swan_tower

April 2025

S M T W T F S
  12345
67 89101112
1314 1516171819
20 212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Apr. 23rd, 2025 01:57 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios