What About Structure?
Terry Odell
Recently, I was looking at a Facebook post mentioning a podcast about voice, and Dr. Doug Lyle was the presenter. Since I know and like him, I was interested in tuning in. This is what he said in his introductory remarks:
“So the one thing that I always tell writers is to forget all the rules, to forget all the three act structure, forget all the first turning point, second turning point, all that stuff because all it’s going to do is, you’re going to start figuring out how am I structuring this rather than telling the damn story. And the single most important thing that sells a book is voice.”
Interesting. I know an author’s voice is a main factor in my continuing to read more of their work. That, and characters, but that’s another discussion for another time.
As someone who never studied writing of any kind beyond writing the compulsory essays in English classes, I’ve never given a lot of thought to how things play out as I’m writing.
A lot of time here at TKZ is spent discussing structure. I’m starting to write my 34th novel. Have I given a thought to pinch points, turning points, signposts, mirror moments, calls to action, point of no return?
Nope. Not a single one.
The book will be another Mapleton Mystery. I’ve written about 15,000 words, and I haven’t even finalized the primary crime yet. There’s the B plot, too, with a secondary crime, and I wonder if I should have some kind of structure for that one, too. Since I’m an “organic” writer (fancy term for pantser), I don’t know how long my book will be, so I don’t have a clue where all these structural pieces would have to go as I write. Plus, I’ve found that when I have any kind of a roadmap, I’m in too much of a hurry to get from point A to point B that I leave out the parts that make up my voice.
At about the same time that I heard Dr. Lyle’s advice, I saw a post from another author acquaintance, Neil Plakcy, which piqued my interest. He was willing to share, and I’m quoting him here.
I was the chief judge for the Lilian Jackson Braun award given out by Mystery Writers of America, which led me to read 80 mystery novels, mostly in the cozy range. It was a great education in structure because most of the books followed a particular path.
A young woman suffers a loss in the big city. Maybe she loses her job or is dumped by her boyfriend. Or maybe she’s just generally unhappy and unfulfilled.
She often inherits a house or a store in her hometown, or a small town where she spent summers with a beloved aunt or grandmother.
By the end of the first chapter she’s picked up and moved to that small town. By the end of the first third, someone is murdered. Maybe an old friend is the victim, or the suspect. Maybe she’s even suspected herself. She becomes an amateur sleuth to clear her name or her friend’s, or to bring justice to her lost friend/family member. Along the way she is attracted to the hunky police detective. (Who knew small-town cops were so handsome?)
Maybe he welcomes her help, or maybe he pushes her away. But by the end of the second chunk of the book, she’s put herself in danger.
Eventually she uses her specific knowledge (of books, baking, candles, etc.) to figure out whodunnit.
Where I cared about the characters, I began dreading that second plot point, when she gets in danger. I just wanted the happy ending without the trauma.
That’s what led me to write The Smiling Dog Cafe, because in Japanese-style healing fiction the stakes are low and the sense of community is high. There can be pain and angst, but it’s threaded through the book rather than in a big plot point.
**My note: Based on reviews, I’m thinking there are a lot of readers who agree.
I will say this. In all of my novels and novellas, I’ve yet to have a reader complain or compliment me on the structure of the book. For me, like for Dr. Lyle, I want to tell a story.
I’m curious as to how much readers pay attention to structure when they’re reading. Are you aware of when things are supposed to happen? Do you anticipate them? Does that enhance or hamper the read?
Writers. Do you follow any given structure as you write, or do you go back and deal with it in edits? Or do you just “tell the damn story?”
New! Find me at Substack with Writings and Wanderings
When breaking family ties is the only option.
Madison Westfield has information that could short-circuit her politician father’s campaign for governor. But he’s family. Although he was a father more in word than deed, she changes her identity and leaves the country rather than blow the whistle.
Blackthorne, Inc. taps Security and Investigations staffer, Logan Bolt, to track down Madison Westfield. When he finds her in the Faroe Islands, her story doesn’t match the one her father told Blackthorne. The investigation assignment quickly switches to personal protection for Madison.
Soon, they’re involved with a drug ring and a kidnapping attempt. Will working together put them in more danger? Can a budding relationship survive the dangers they encounter?
Like bang for your buck? I have a new Mapleton Bundle. Books 4, 5, and 6 for one low price.
Terry Odell is an award-winning author of Mystery and Romantic Suspense, although she prefers to think of them all as “Mysteries with Relationships.”
Terry, thanks for an interesting post.
Some people are natural storytellers and some aren’t. Some writers have an instinctive sense of what needs to happen, when, and how. A good voice is what keeps their stories from being predictable.
For a long time, I struggled with structure b/c I’m also a pantser. The “O” word (outline) still makes my muscles tighten. I confused structure with formula, which sounds more like what Neil Plaksy is talking about. To me, formula is boring.
Structure is less about hitting certain beats at certain times in a story. For me, it’s more an intuitive sense of what triggers a character to make a change and how that change leads them in a different direction.
Thanks, Debbie. When I hear Dr. Lyle’s statement, I thought, “This will make for an interesting TKZ post. Neil’s comments gave more things to think about. There’s no ‘right’ or wrong, as far as I’m concerned. You do what works for you.
Every writer of commercial fiction uses structure, either intentionally or instinctively. Some use it better than others, which is where craft study helps. Heck, you can’t even write a sentence without structure. The real beef here is about outlining/planning, not structure. I may have to write (yet another) post on this topic, but meanwhile interested folks can go to:
https://killzoneblog.com/2015/02/story-and-structure-in-love.html
I knew you’d chime in, JSB, and thanks for the link. In the end, you have to, as Dr. Lyle says, “write the damn story.”
What he said. 😀
To answer your question, I do notice structure while reading. If the author sucks me in, I don’t usually anticipate it but recognize and appreciate it after the fact. If anything, I applaud the author for a job well done.
Thanks, Sue. Anticipating turning points pulls me out of the story.
I am brainstorming my new story and what my character’s turning points could potentially be, which means figuring out the inciting incident, doorway 1, mirror midpoint, etc.
After all the trouble and time I put into my first/second story (same characters, better focused plot…I hope), I wanted to write not quite so much by the seat of my pants. I don’t seem to (yet?) have the intuitive sense that Debbie wrote of above in telling a story.
The Japanese style healing fiction intrigues me. Something to study, Thank you Terry, for getting my brain going this morning!
You’re quite welcome, Lisa.
At Left Coast Crime a few years back, the featured authors were on a closing panel and asked about their process. It was about a 50-50 split between “outliners/plotters/planners” and “organic/pantsers.” One one writer must have scares others.
I think we all (both readers and writers) have a sense of how a story should be told. “The arc of the plot” seems to be a good way to look at it. Setup -> rising action -> crisis / climax -> resolution -> falling action. Although I don’t outline ahead of time, my stories take that general shape as I’m writing. After the first draft, there’s a lot of editing to make sure the story arc is a smooth one.
also try to include a mirror moment around the midpoint in the story. (Thanks to JSB!)
Thanks, Kay – I think of my first draft as my outline/plotting. But I’ve never consciously gone back to look to see where things happen. I keep thinking readers might be counting pages, looking to see if I hit the marks. Opening the book to the middle to see if there’s going to be a mirror moment. I’ve enjoyed many a book without paying any attention to where things happen, other than knowing things might “get western” to quote Joe Pickett near the end.
When I started writing, I tried outlining the whole book, but that didn’t work. Since then I usually outline like I drive in a fog–just as far as I can see, usually the next chapter. The only exception is I try to visualize the midpoint in the book. I seem to hit the other plot points without writing them down before I start, probably because I’ve read a ton of craft books and internalized some of the information on plotting.
I’m like you, Patricia. I can see about 2 or 3 chapters ahead, and that’s about it. When I have things like signposts or turning points in my head, I write too fast to get to them and leave out story depth, and then I have to go back and put it in, which seems harder for me after the fact instead of letting things unfold as they come.
While I am a founder of the “write the damn story” school of writing, I agree with Brother Jim that every successful story has it, even if I could not personally articulate what it is. In my mind, it means, “this has to happen in order for that to make sense.” Or, “nothing really exciting has happened in the last 30 pages, so I need to fix that.” Or, “we’ve spent a lot of time with secondary characters; it’s time to hear from Jonathan and his team.”
If you’ll forgive a cooking analogy, an element like structure is to a story what an ingredient like cardamom is to a recipe. No one has ever said, “Man, this dish needs cardamom.” Instead, they might say, “Wow, I wonder what made that dish stand out from others like it?”
We seem to have very similar writing processes, John. I want each scene to end with a page-turner, and in doing so, it seems a lot of the things you’ve mentioned automatically fall into place.
Cardamom, not turmeric? Just not cilantro!
Heathen! I just planted two big cilantro plants. I LOVE cilantro!
Can’t help it. I have the gene that makes anything with cilantro taste like soap. Nothing I can do about it.
Perfect, Brother John. I often respond to those who say structure is too much like a “formula” by asking them to cook an omelet without eggs and a pan. You gotta have those or nobody’s goingn to come to your restaurant.
It’s the spices you add, and how much, that makes the unique taste. That’s author voice and craft added to the structure.
Cook on.
I’m a major structure junkie, and find structure to provide important guide posts for my fiction.
Last month, I attended a “refresher” workshop for graduates of Kij Johnson’s Novel Architects workshop, and big part of the new-to-me material was the concept of story pillars—essentially narrative arcs, one for events/plot, one for the interpersonal (romance, friendship etc), one for inner character arc, and one for the world/setting itself. Obviously, not all are fully realized, though in some novels they can be.
However, a trap I can fall into is spending too much time in pre-writing/outlining, which makes me pine for my bygone pantsing days. However, I recently attempted to pants a novel—perhaps I was over controlling the process (which wouldn’t surprise me) but it ended up floundering. I may return with a lighter hand or an actual high-level outline.
I tend to plunge in with the writing, then work from there. Often, the opening scenes/chapters are for me, and they don’t end up in the book as written, but they lay some foundation for my ride to ‘the end.’
Meant to add that I totally agree about the power of voice to draw a reader in, especially at the outset of a novel.
Thanks, Dale, for pointing out what triggered this post to begin with. If I can’t connect with the author’s voice, all the structure in the world won’t help the story for me.
Neil Plakcy is obviously not a fan of cozy mysteries so I’d take his advice with a crap-ton of salt. The books he’s describing are also first-in-series books setting up the premise, the main characters, and the small town.
Things like the hunky policeman are solutions to the amateur sleuth problem. How does someone investigate a murder without having a gatekeeper who lets them in? The early books in the series convince the cop that the heroine sleuth can help because she has a unique insight, and the romance/conflict adds emotional depth to their relationship.
Some cozy mystery series have changed from a murder mystery to a gossipy town mystery to fix someone’s problem. Nancy Atherton’s “Aunt Dimity” series is an example. Some readers continue to follow because they love the characters, other’s do not.
Anyway, I’d quibble about using voice to include plot structure. But, yes, I consider plot structure to be very important. It’s the river that moves the story forward. Without those plot points, you have a sluggish creek that keeps disappearing in drainage ditches and culverts. You may be Stephen King whose muse fairy makes the plot magically appear as you write, or you may have to figure out all the plot points, but, if plot isn’t there, you have an embarrassing mess.
Mariylynn – thanks for your comments. I’m not seeing anything in the rules for submitting a book for the Lilian Jackson Braun Award that says it needs to be first in series.
My take on Neil’s comments were that he grew tired of –call it what you will, “formula” or “structure” which led him to write a book based on the Japanese style.
I’m presently reading and working through Randy Ingermanson’s The Snowflake Method for my next novel.
And having a ball with it!
🥳
I’ve heard of this, along with many other methods. Haven’t tried them. Since I write genre fiction, I try to hit reader expectations, and have things happen in the right order, but getting them to hit in specific places eludes me.
I just tell the story. I’ve published about 35 novels with no thought for anything else. I’m with Steven James : Story trumps structure BUT writers should do whatever works for them!
I’m with you, Kelly. Thirty-plus novels, a handful of novellas and some short stories. And yes, do whatever works.
I am one fo those “discovery” writers. plots and points can come later, but for me, that isn’t what is important. I want to get into my character and make it their story, not a plot. I use motivation and a goal and go from there.
I’m still working on writing that best seller. But until then, I’ll keep working on my character’s growth and life and settings and life events that make them interesting.
Sounds like a good play, B.A. That ‘best seller’ category is a tough one to break into. Most writers fall into the mid-list category, and I’m one of those readers who wants to read about characters. I’m from the GMC school–Goal, Motivation, and Conflict. I wish you the best.