Structure...?

[blgarver]

So, I'm having somewhat of a conflict with structure.  Well, actually, my book has no solid structure. 

Therein lies my conflict.

I'm sort of at odds with outlining and structure.  I'm afraid to fall into a formula and risk being unoriginal.  I know everything is stolen from everything else, but if everyone's using the same structure, then it REALLY sounds like the same story.  I'd rather disguise that.

Life doesn't really happen according to a structure, and a story is about a character's or a group of characters' and a certain point in their life.  So I let the story happen that way.  I mean, there's still buildup and climax and suspense and conflict and all that, but I don't think I could really sit down and map out the structure.  At least, if I did, it would one effed up looking map.

Anyone else stray from the formula at all, or do you think it's better/more productive to stick with the 3 or 5 act structure?

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

I'm sort of at odds with outlining and structure.  I'm afraid to fall into a formula and risk being unoriginal.  I know everything is stolen from everything else, but if everyone's using the same structure, then it REALLY sounds like the same story.

"everything is stolen from everyone else" seems perilous close to post-modernism, and I succeeded in my saving throw against that some time ago.

Life doesn't really happen according to a structure, and a story is about a character's or a group of characters' and a certain point in their life.

Life may not have narrative flow, but the way people talk about it and think about it does. And not all fiction has to be true to life in that way.  Not every novel wants to get as much of the normally left out bits and bobs of everyday life as Ulysses in, frex.  At least in my not-notably-humble opinion.

Anyone else stray from the formula at all, or do you think it's better/more productive to stick with the 3 or 5 act structure?

I don't think these are the only options at all, really.  Structure seems to be something that my own stories will usually reliably give me as they go along, be that three "acts" or eight or something else entirely.  I think there's more really good advice out there about structure in writing for screenplays, in particular - William Goldman's two Adventures in the Screen Trade book are wonderful - where thinking in terms of acts is the standard for the form - than for novels.

Have you read Iain M. Banks' Use of Weapons ? I'd recommend it, if you're thinking heavily about structure.  Probably the best example of doing two threads converging on a climactic event  in recent fiction.

[Dom]

I don't worry about structure myself...some stories have one type of structure, others a different type, so I sort of feel it out as I go.  I think of it as architecture--some houses are bungalows, some are ranches, some mansions, some mobile homes.    All are houses, the structure just differs a bit and is best for certain types of people.  Some structures are better for different types of stories.

[Belial]

I was actually thinking about something close to this the other day, and I came to the conclusion that there are two basic types of characters (don't worry, I think this is on topic, just bear with me for a moment). 

There are characters where form follows function, and characters where function follows form.

Form follows function would be a more structured approach; i.e. the story calls for this type of character, so I'll create this type of character to do this, he'll need this quality and this quality and this quality, etc etc.

Function follows form is somewhat less structured (in terms of story); i.e. I have a great idea for a character, so I create a world for him to play around in and the plot comes along as the character goes along.

These are (in my opinion) the two basic types of characters and stories; one where the plot is what is of utmost importance, the other where the characters are. There are many different shades of grey between these, and I doubt any story is purely one or the other, although they may have heavy leanings towards one.

So it sounds to me like you want to do a story where function follows form, but you are worried that it would be better if form followed function. In my opinion they are equally valid approaches, although I also think that one should not be forsaken entirely for the other. I usually start with a few characters that I've created (function follows form) then drop them into a situation I think is interesting (form follows function) and let the two define each other. 

[terioncalling]

I used to try a sort of structure or outline and my brain ceased working so I threw that out the proverbial window.  Now I just write as it comes and try to keep the characters as close to my extremely loose outlines as I can.  But if they come up with something good, I may just decide to go along with it.  ^^

Or maybe I do follow structure though I don't know it and when the writer's board gets up'n running someone can inform me of this.

[blgarver]

Okay.  These replies have softened some of my fears about my story.  I guess now that I think about it, I do have a series of plot points that I want to reach, and I'm leaving it up to the characters to make it happen.  So I'm using some sort of structure, though I'm not sure what it's called or if it's called anything at all.

I have a degree in Video Production, which is the baby brother of a film degree.  Part of the coursework was screenwriting.  I had a couple of screenwriting courses...Video Film Scripting and Script Analysis.  These classes destroyed my ability to write a screenplay.  Because you can't teach someone to be creative and come up with a good, original story.  But you can teach someone the nuts and bolts of how you put a good, original story into a screenplay.  After those classes I was all about the character breakdowns and script breakdowns and the formulae for this and that, and the character arcs and the rise in action in the plot, yadda yadda.  Those classes got me thinking so much about the structure of the thing that I started to just fill in the blanks, thinking that once I got all the nuts and bolts together, I'd have built something that functioned.

But alas, that was not the case.

So, this is why I only write prose now.  Much more freedom.

[Josh]

Two suggestions, worth what you paid for them.

One. Give yourself fluid structure. Outline a story to give yourself some initial momentum, and then shove the outline into a deep, dark cave and don't look at it again until you either finish the story or just want to look back on it and see how much it has changed from the original plot points. I do this a bit, and it helps me focus on the story, but also maintain that freedom.

Or, two, take it to a micro-level of structure. If you're having trouble with the story going all over the place for some reason, then maybe work on a scene by using MRU's. Motivation-Reaction units. Ask yourself at any time, "What's the motivation here?" and then, "How will this character react to it?" A motivation can be anything from unbearable thirst to a gun pointed in your face to that beautiful woman who just winked at you. Reaction can be...anything that the character might do that is in line with who they are. Do that once. Once they've reacted, then there's a new motivation and a new reaction. Repeat until the climax. Take it one tiny step at a time and build on each. Again, this is nothing that has to define your story or restrict its potential, it's just a rough boundary that can keep you from going crazy trying to rope in every potential thread of plot and subplot.

Hope this helps in some small way.

[Abstruse]

There's a big balancing act here.  On one hand, you don't want to follow "the formula" and be completely unoriginal.  However, you also want to make sure you don't lose structure completely.

A few months ago, I read a book that was an autobiography of a young woman as a private detective, but she tried to structure it as a novel.  However, because she was sticking too strictly to the truth of what happened, there was no structure at all.  It was just a bunch of stuff that happened to her.  There was no story arch, there was a beginning in that she got hired by the detective agency, but beyond that there was nothing.  It was interesting, but it felt scattered and very unfulfilling.  And this was an autobiography, so I wasn't expecting a story.

It's one thing to throw a monkey wrench into the works and do something insane like killing off who the readers think is the main character on page 120, but try to pick some sort of very basic structure and stick to it at least, whether it's the three acts of a screenplay, the five acts/five parts/two scenes structure of a Shakesperian play...just pick something.  Otherwise, there'll be no real feeling of resolution and your readers will be left feeling blah at the end.

The Abstruse One
Darryl Mott Jr.