What I Learned From Write Your Novel From the Middle

Posted: March 12, 2015 in writing
Tags: , , , , , , ,

In a post last week I wrote about James Scott Bell’s Write Your Novel From the Middle. Afterwards, AC Macklin raised a rather sensible question whose answer I had skipped over – what were the things of value I learned from this book? In my enthusiasm to talk about the book in general, I missed the useful details. So here they are…

Explaining the Value of Structure

There’s a quote from the book that I included last week – ‘Structure is translation software for your imagination.’ I think that quote, and what it represents, are very useful in understanding the value of structure.

Structure isn’t there to tell you what story to write or what ideas to discuss. It’s there to help you turn those ideas into something coherent and accessible, to fit your story into the form you’re writing in, whether it’s a novel, a screenplay or a haiku.

Act One

Bell raised a set of interesting questions to make sure you’re covering the important things in the first act of your story:

  • have you given readers a character worth following?
  • is there a disturbance to their life early on?
  • do you know the death stakes of the story? – this doesn’t have to mean literal death, but what physical, emotional or professional destruction the character is threatened with
  • is there a scene forcing the character into the confrontation of act two, and is it strong enough that the character can’t resist getting involved?

These are ideas I was already familiar with, but Bell’s list provides a great sanity check, a way of making sure that the elements are in place to make the story compelling.

The Midpoint

Bell refined my thinking on the midpoint. In Wells’s seven point structure, this is the moment when the protagonist becomes pro-active. For Bell, it’s a point where the forces arrayed against the protagonist seem so vast that if they go on they will almost certainly face physical, psychological or professional death.

These are quite different things to build the centre of a story around, but what strikes me is that they’re both about the need to make a decision to act, whether by switching from passivity to pro-activity, or by deciding to act despite the danger.

I think that combining those two could make for some incredibly powerful central story moments.

Proving Change

A good character arc is almost always about change. Bell points out that this change needs to be proven by the character’s actions, not just something they think or talk about. By working outwards from inner revelation to actual acts, you prove far more effectively that the character has changed, both to the reader and to the other characters in the story.

Flaw

The need for characters to have flaws is common advice. Bell suggests a refinement of this, that if you can it’s good to give your central character a moral flaw that is hurting others.

OK, that’s a potentially very dark point, but it’s similar in value to that point about proving change. A moral flaw that hurts others is more substantial – it has real consequences, not just internalised angst, and it matters to other characters. It’s a much more substantial flaw.

Pitching

The single most useful thing I got out of this book wasn’t about structuring my stories, it was about pitching them. The pitch structure Bell provides consists of three sentences:

  1. Your lead character’s name, vocation and initial situation.
  2. ‘When’ + the main plot problem.
  3. ‘Now’ + the death stakes.

Despite years of being told I should have elevator pitches for my projects at work, I never got the hang of pitching. But reading this gave me such a clear, simple structure to follow that I immediately went and tried it out on the stories I’m writing. So, for the book I’m currently working on:

Dirk Dynamo is enjoying a life of learning with the gentlemen adventurers of the Epiphany Club. Joining an expedition to find the Great Library of Alexandria, Dirk finds himself on the island of Hakon, where colonial life is not what it seems. With monsters in the jungle, conspiracies in the mansion and ninjas dogging his trail, can Dirk and his friends find the first clue to the Library before they meet a deadly fate?

OK, I didn’t actually use the words ‘when’ and ‘now’, but the essence of the structure is there. And I don’t know about you, but I’m more excited about my book after seeing it summarised like that. That’s most of my blurb right there.

On Writing Life

Finally, there were two points that I wrote out on cards and stuck to my desk to remind myself of their importance

  • when writing becomes drudgery go do something else for a while
  • daydream about the rewards of your writing, however intangible, to keep you motivated

I struggle with motivation a lot. These were good reminders of things that I know in principle but often forget in practice.

Worth the Reading

The focus of my previous post on Write Your Novel From the Middle probably seemed down on the book, because I was disappointed after hearing it raved about. But as I also said in that post, there was stuff of real value in there, and I consider it time and money well spent. Just not the game changer it’s sometimes sold as being.

Advertisements
Comments
  1. everwalker says:

    Thank you!

    The change of focus on the midpoint is particularly interesting to me. Having it become the point at which the character decides to go despite the risk, rather than the point at which the character decides they need to get involved, is much more powerful. Making it a conscious decision also draws the audience’s attention to that risk in a far stronger, more emotional way.

  2. wgosline says:

    This advice mirrors a lot of work focusing on screenplay structure. I like your pitch, btw.

    • Thanks for the comment on the pitch – if people reading this like it that’s a good sign!

      A lot of advice on screenwriting seems to be used for novel writing too – one of my favourite writing books is McKee’s ‘Story’, which is written for screenwriters.

  3. Sue Archer says:

    You’ve got a great pitch there, Andrew. I love the model! Thanks for sharing your learnings.

  4. Reblogged this on The 960 Writers and commented:
    I just read this book and the one about Super Structure that covers some of his points more thoroughly. It is a lot of information condensed into short books and I think I need about three repeat readings to get it settled in my head.
    I really like how Bell approaches writing, like a craft that has many tools for us to use. I find his books about writing very helpful and comparing my two WIPs, I can now see why one works and one doesn’t. For the one that works, I unconsciously started with a structure like Bell recommends, the other just kind of hangs there.
    One may not agree with his formulaic approach but if you find yourself wondering, if or why this book feels like it’s missing something, his advice about structure is a good starting point to see where a novel could be improved.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s