I'm going to borrow a page from Bethany's book (pun intended) and indulge in a minor rant. Please, don't expect the same caliber of wit and observation -- I am but a soap box novice next to her. However, this week I had a major disappointment and it went like this:
I borrowed a book from the library by one of my top five favorite authors. This is a guy I read all the time, I enjoy his continuing characters, his plots and his writing style (apart from his use of parenthesis within POV. That always yells author intrusion to me.) Anyway, while going through his book list on Amazon I found I'd missed a book that came out a couple of years ago.
And, oh yeah, it featured barracuda, hence the photo of that handsome guy up there.
Anyway, at the same time I started reading his book, I was hip deep in my own book, plotting the backstory. The husband in my book never makes a single scene except for the one where they come across his body, but what he's done with his life is the major catalyst behind the whole book. He's a con man and a manipulator. His last act, before moving north and causing mayhem in the lives of some perfectly nice people, is the single most important thing he does. It involves robbery and murder and double crossing. It's his backstory.
*** Once the current story begins, it's up to the writer to cleverly leave hints that the other characters uncover so they can reconstruct the past and figure out how to stop, mitigate or enjoy the current situation. ***
My book starts at the point of time where everything that's come before (off stage) hits critical mass and the world begins to unravel. Not just his, but the lives of the people around him.
The author I'm talking about, a man who has written award winning books, started his book with a scene detailing exactly what happened 30 years before. Not a prologue, mind you. Not a teaser. He then told us exactly how each of the suspects felt about the potential victim. Using a well established pattern in mystery (a dastardly deed and a list of suspects which this author has pulled off admirably several times before) he told us everything we needed to know and then he segued into the story.
In my opinion, he didn't trust his characters to discover the truths they would need to know. No, I'll go further. He didn't trust his readers to take the journey with them.
This book did not really get going until well after page fifty, and to make it worse, every time one of the characters finally revealed their piece of knowledge about the past we all ready knew it, we'd read it a hundred pages before! We knew when they were right or wrong, we'd been a witness at the real event. We knew when the characters were lying about motivations, etc., because we'd been told how they really felt a long time before. Merciful heavens, how this guts a plot.
You kind of expect this kind of thing from newbies. I know I did it, I know the temptation to include all those wonderful scenes and the action is hypnotic -- sometimes it seems the backstory is so much more interesting than what happens in the book and it feels wrong not to include it. But it's precisely because of what it does to the rest of the book that it is so wrong. Your reader is reading -- not only in mysteries but in other genres -- to discover the questions and answers for themselves. If you hand them over before the book starts there's not much for them to do but look at the words and wish they couldn't anticipate every single thing that was about to happen.
When I plot nowadays, I write pages of what any one character knows about a situation. Not what he thinks, what he knows given his POV so that he can respond appropriately and not have knowledge he couldn't have. It was as though this author included those pages at the front. I hope I am making this clear.
So, Wavy, for you perhaps it's an over the top hero or any one of a dozen other devices a writer -- almost any writer -- occasionally slips into. For me it's this backstory issue. A good book needs a hell of a backstory. And an even better book needs to reveal it properly. In my opinion, this man's editor let him down big time, but frankly, I just can't imagine what he was thinking.
One example we can probably all relate to: Indiana Jones, Raiders of the Lost Ark. It starts in the jungle before the current story with an exciting adventure scene, then moves into the current plot for that movie. That glimpse of the professor as a man of action is not only great fun but it's revealing and sets the stage for the upcoming romp. Okay, what I am talking about is this: What if the first 1/5 of the movie detailed the creation of the Ark? What was put inside, how it ended up where it did, how the Nazi patsy archeologist got to the point where he was willing to sell his soul for glory. Now start the movie -- do you see how knowing all that other stuff up front ruins the fun? So what if they find it, we knew all along where it was. So what if they open it, yawn, here we go, same old same old.
Agree? Disagree? Have an even bigger and badder issue that tears you from a book?
Do tell…..
12 comments:
Since you liked the handsome barracuda, you should check the novel, Barracuda, by Mike Monahan on Amazon. Another handsome barracuda graces the book cover and the story is pretty good as well. If you liked Jaws, you'll love Barracuda :-)
Mike Monahan
shameless author
Agree, Alice. Opening with backstory and giving away the entire plot at the onset defeats the purpose of reading it.
I have a friend who opens his book using the "frame" effect. That's when the narrator announces he's about to tell a story, and before he does, he lets the reader know how things turned out. The story will explain how it happened. Hello? Then what's the point of reading it? It's kind of an old fashioned approach to story telling, and he's a retired engineer, so it doesn't surprise me that he'd use this approach. Neither am I surprised that no agents have expressed any interest in representing it.
Mike here must have googled Barracuda to find our blog. I took a peak at his book on Amazon and it's everything a self-published book should be. Nuff said.
Hi, Alice!
I think you just gave me a duh answer to how I should handle the final book in my nine-book series. Don't start with the now-deceased father's story, but let the current characters uncover his story as the final book rebuilds his tarnished legacy. Too simple!
The current issue that tears me out of a book: a heroine who is bitchy for no apparent reason or a lame reason and a guy who's still attracted to her. Or a variation of that theme with the "hero" being nasty and the heroine still thinking he's attractive. Obviously a reflection of lessons I'm learning in my own life: don't sweat the small stuff and, in the overall scheme of things, most things are small stuff.
Your book sounds exciting! I love being dropped into the middle of the action when I read a book.
Karen, I'll try to get back to your blog class later today. Just doing a quick check of blogs and e-mail before I dash off to do errands. But I'll be baaaaack...
And, Alice, thanks for the aha moment!
Mike, your barracuda and mine look like brothers. I guess they all tend to look a lot alike, as though thy need to all go to the same dentist.
Congratulations on your first book! And thanks for checking in -- even if it was for shameless self promotion;-)
Karen -- What in the world was I thinking writing a serious piece for a day in this particular week? Silly me.
Meanwhile, that framing thing -- shudder -- sounds dreadful. I do recognize the style, I suppose from some book I read at one time. It's almost a narrative and those can be tricky, too.
The thing is my husband, who just reads for enjoyment but also likes this author read the book first and said it's boring. After I read it we talked about why it was boring. But your average reader is just going to mark your name off the list, period.
Btw, I can't believe the traffic you go on your left behind blog. I signed in the first day and the email came fast and furious. Been too busy to get involved except to read what you write every day and I like the way you are honing in on the senses.
Genene- I adore hearing I actually inspired an aha moment!!!! Good for me!!!!
It sounds as if you have a plan, baby.
Alice, good blog. Mindless backstory annoys me too, although I have also caught myself doing it.
Another annoyance is too alpha of a hero -- as in "wow, what a jerk!"
Genene hates bitchy heroines. I hate assholey heros.
The first time our man's man hero bosses our heart-of-gold heroine around, without a perfectly good reason, such as if she doesn't go with him she will die, the author has lost my loyalty, baby.
And hey, Mike. Drop in again. Feel free to leave comments about the topic of the day. Best of luck with your book.
Danita. I didn't explain myself well. I am not talking mindless backstory. That, to me, is chatter that tells way more than I want to know. I mean, who cares what kind of toothpaste your beloved character uses? Unless it's going to blow up her gums, leave me out of it, please.
I'm talking about telling the plot before actually showing it. Telling, in other words, that this and this happened, and then expecting me to be all agog when it's revealed later. There's a difference and I am probably still using the wrong words.
I hate out of place anger, too. The kind that really gets me is a shrill heroine who is being mean spirited without provocation -- when I read this kind of person, I always see the author working out man/woman relationships and taking the workshop "Make Your Heroine Sassy" way too much to heart. As for cruel men -- who needs or wants them? Okay, I agree, I don't like either of these kind of people, not in fact or fiction. (Thankfully, neither kind tend to roam between the pages of a good mystery...)
I think I'm fighting an Aha moment. The WIP that I'm editing begins at a funeral, which sets up the rest of the book, wherein heroine is trying to solve the mess that her father left behind. But perhaps, I should just toss her into the mess? I'm *hoping* that my chapter is not just backstory b/c heroine is discovering exactly what her problem(s) are. The CAUSE of the problems remains shrouded until the end.
I think the backstory problem is directly related to deep POV. Writers tend to slip into backstory mode when they break POV. When editing, I keep asking myself, "What is she thinking RIGHT NOW?" And "Who's POV do we really need here?" If you limit it to what the POV character is ACTUALLY thinking, then you are less likely to segway into the history of the conflict or revealing key points.
I think sometimes even NYT authors get a little lazy, and do more telling than showing.
This isn't a Carl Hiassen novel that you refer to is it???
Oh darn it to high holy heck. It's me. Bethany. Must not check email first. Ever.
Wavy, we all know it's you, no worries. No, it's not Carl Hiassen. The author is Aaron Elkins, and let me restate, I love this guy. It's just this one book that left me befuddled. The book in question is Little Tiny Teeth. I think that's the title. Something like that. Again, loved all his other books, this one just baffled me.
Well, as far as your book goes, I don't know what to say. But I think that starting it at the funeral IS tossing her into the middle of things, isn't it? Again, I am expressing myself so poorly. Go check out this book. Look up the author and it'll give you the exact title. Don't judge his other books from this one, please. Every author deserves an occasional ack moment. But read the book and you will see exactly what I mean. Trust me. This particular book has the most blatant example of intruding backstory I've ever seen.
If you do read it, let me know what you think...
Let me know.
I thought I'd be all alone checking the blog this time of night, and others are still up and on the computer.
Alice, you must be typing your fingers to the bone on your story! How is it going?
No serious stuff for the blog this week, huh? Dang, there goes my topic for tomorrow! Will have to think of something else...
Post a Comment