Cliff Hangers

glutton · Mar 20, 2006

DaveKuzminski said:
So, throughout the series, it's like watching how battles in different places bring about the destruction of the enemy in a realistic manner with lots of heroes instead of just one character responsible. It also permits more realistic character development because some people learn and change while others never do.

I actually kind of like this idea, but it's not for every story. Some sagas are the tale of a people or society, but others are the story of one (or a few) legend who really know how to kick that rear, and tons of it.

Also, even if you have only a couple of central central characters, they can still show varying degrees of character development- and so can supporting characters who change (or don't) over the course of a story.

Jamesaritchie · Mar 20, 2006

Plot

DaveKuzminski said:
By "nearly the same" plot, I was referring to the fact that there are supposedly only a limited number of plots that can be used. I've heard seven, thirteen, and a few other low numbers. When you come down to it, there's a lot of truth to the claim that there are only so many plots. What actually changes is how each plot is filled out and embellished.

What I also like about the method I'm using for one series is that the main character in book one doesn't have to cause the downfall of the evil empire. Instead, the main character can simply be the Paul Revere of the world in question making it known that there's an evil coming to do battle. Then other heroes can be encountered and followed in this new world of adventure and each can have different personalities, virtues, advantages, and disadvantages.

In fact, one of my favorite characters is one who was thrown into a situation where he didn't have a choice but to accept the position he was given even though the people who placed him in that position didn't want him to do anything but help them make money, not defend their port. However, he felt a kinship with others who voyaged the seas and when one ship was attacked outside his harbor, he ventured out even though he and his crew hadn't been trained to fight. They were going to do the honorable thing even if it killed them. Of course, they survived because providence stepped in and the sounds of their drum echoed against the cliffs to make it sound like there were four ships coming to the rescue which drove off the attack before they could even be seen.

So, throughout the series, it's like watching how battles in different places bring about the destruction of the enemy in a realistic manner with lots of heroes instead of just one character responsible. It also permits more realistic character development because some people learn and change while others never do.

I think such can work, but I do think there's a limit to how many books you can do this with, and how many characters you can use in doing it. It's sort of the way the Star Wars novels work.

But while there are a limited number of plots, usually listed as man against man, man against nature, man against God, and man against himself, with nitpickers putting in man against woman, and man against machine, the number of stories that can be written using these plots is infite.

Story is not at all the same thing as plot, and darned few readers in the world care a whit about plot. What the vast majority of readers want is a good story, well-told, and filled with characters they love. When you take away a character readers love, you're taking a huge chance.

I think rotating already loved characters, plus combining and re-combing them, works better, as is also done in the Star Wars novels.

But when you have a character readers love, stick with that character and reader will stick with you forever.

DaveKuzminski · Mar 20, 2006

Well, I did cheat in a way by introducing three sets of characters in the first book. That lets me concentrate on some of them while introducing others.

victoria.goddard · Apr 5, 2006

definition of a series

What actually constitutes a series, in your opinion(s)? Does it have to have the same main character or characters following one or a series of plot arcs--for example, the Harry Potter books or the David Edding ones--or can a series simply be a sequence of books, more or less chronological (but not necessary), set all within one narrative world? Just to use another well-read series, are the Valdemar books by Mercedes Lackey one series, or many? Obviously there are smaller sequences within the larger one, some of which are more stand-alone than others, but they all fit together.

My WIP describes one intense week of major character development in the life of my MC, who's actions are highly influential around the rest of the narrative world (which in fact is made up of nine). The conclusion will draw this story to a close, quite neatly I think, but will also open up room for other stories I intend to write in the future. But the next work is going to be set within the same world, a bit later on, but with a set of characters who are only mentioned obliquely in the WIP. Those ones I could see becoming a series; but I'm not sure if the whole thing is a series, or a set of books with characters that hear about each other and whose lives interact.

More Diana Wynne Jones' Chrestomanci, I imagine, than Mercedes Lackey.

Birol · Apr 5, 2006

I think both situations you describe fit the definition of a series.

Pthom · Apr 5, 2006

Isaac Asimov's Foundation series spans centuries. A single protagonist (or any other character) in all of the books (not even in a single one, since each volume spans several lifetimes) is obviously impossible and had Asimov done that, the story would have failed. Yet it is one of the most popular science fiction stories of all time.

Cliff Hangers

glutton

Jamesaritchie

DaveKuzminski

Preditors & Editors

victoria.goddard

Birol

Around and About

Pthom

Word butcher