The Sword and Laser discussion

I used to listen to the Writing Excuses Podcast a lot, and one guy on there talked frequently about the seven-point story structure. Because this book feels more like a movie being described (to me) and because I'm listening to the audio, I really noticed "Part Seven" coming up and containing all of the final blowout, which would probably be exciting in a theater.

(I think this structure is borrowed from film scripts, as far as I remember their discussion on the podcast. Bear with me. This makes sense in my head.)

Do you think this is Chuck's thinly veiled underlying structure?

I fully agree that the book is set like a movie, not only in structure but in vivid descriptions and absence of 'internal monologue' or characters' thoughts

Yeah I think he might have used that. The question I would have then is does it matter? If you notice, I guess it kind of matters since it takes you out of the world a bit but at a certain point sophisticated readers who are also writers are going to run into that problem a lot. Maybe that's why all movie critics hate movies.

Tom wrote: "Maybe that's why all movie critics hate movies. .."

Writers seem to be fans of other writers... They know how damn hard it is.

Tom wrote: "Yeah I think he might have used that. The question I would have then is does it matter? If you notice, I guess it kind of matters since it takes you out of the world a bit but at a certain point so..."

Well I do think structure is interesting to talk about.., isn’t this a book club? ;)

Jenny (Reading Envy) wrote: "Tom wrote: "Yeah I think he might have used that. The question I would have then is does it matter? If you notice, I guess it kind of matters since it takes you out of the world a bit but at a cert..."

Totally. You have caught me doing the internet thing of reading all written comments like complaints about something. :| It's a cool observation.

I think about this kind of thing a lot when I read a new book too. It's unquestionable that some authors go so far as to even write their books with the hopes that it will be easy to turn their work into a screen play. However, I also think might be a by-product of just how modern stories work too. There's kind of an expectation on the reader's part that a modern story is going to follow a certain pattern. There's going to be something exciting at the beginning to draw them in, and the the protagonist is going to have to follow a certain story arc where there's an exciting climax, and he/she's going to have to overcome some internal conflict in order to tackle the external conflict. For good or ill, long gone are the days where a book like A Tale of Two Cities could be published, where Dickens drones on for over 50 pages at the beginning before the book ever begins to touch the main plot.

I don't know that many authors really sit down and consciously think, "okay, how can I do yet another reiteration of the hero's journey?" But on some level, they use it because they know it works, and they know it's what will ultimately lead to them getting their work published, and selling their books.

There are well known structures that make a story work. That's just human nature. We like stories to fit a certain way. If they are TOO similar we don't like it but if it's TOO experimental we don't like it.

Tom wrote: "There are well known structures that make a story work. That's just human nature. We like stories to fit a certain way. If they are TOO similar we don't like it but if it's TOO experimental we don'..."

Yes! Exactly the words I was trying to find, Tom!

Jenny (Reading Envy) wrote: "I used to listen to the Writing Excuses Podcast a lot, and one guy on there talked frequently about the seven-point story structure. Because this book feels more like a movie being described (to me..."

Jenny, you might be interested in the link I just posted in the thread about present tense. You were definitely on the right track in thinking that this seemed like a screenplay.