Odd writing choices

[Britva415]

Could you explain framing?

Think of it like:

How does it come about, in-universe, that there exists occasional for an audience to be given both points of view?

Is it a manuscript? How did that get put together? How did the 1p part of it get recorded, written or told at all? How did it get put together with another POV? Who are the intended audience, in-universe?

"Frame" is anything which answers any of these questions, or even suggests that answers exist, even without answering them.

 

[iwatchus]

How does it come about, in-universe, that there exists occasional for an audience to be given both points of view?

No I did not do this. The goal was to make the sessions feel almost clinical. It is not a close third and no insight into any character's mindset at all, beyond what is visible to an observer.

I write mostly in first person, so that feels natural to me and doesn't seem to need framing, but I'm probably wrong. If you are willing, I would love to hear your take on this aspect of the story. It was a real experiment for me and got virtually no feedback so I don't know if it was so awful as to drive people away or what. But the rating was solid (4.81).

The story is Mistress Natasha, if you care to look. No ill will if you don't, but I would be very curious for your feedback, positive or negative.

It just occurred to me that this is another story probably getting abused by the section separator bug. If you read and it suddenly feels odd, try refreshing the page. Same it, this bug pisses me off.

 

[YmaOHyd]

Could you explain framing?

Framing is a technique used to bring in outside context to help create structure within the story. Much of Odyssey is framed as Odysseus telling his story to an audience in the court of Alcinous and Arete, making it a story within a story, and that sets the expectation that Odysseus is an unreliable narrator. Framing can be structural -- "At the Mountains of Madness" is framed as a letter or essay attempting to persuade a university to cancel an expedition -- or it can be shared set of tropes and expectations that go with a particular story form -- the Coming of Age story, the Underdog Story, the, uh, Backseat Mommy story. A lot of the time when we talk about tropes, we're talking about framing.

So we know the effect you're going for with the POV shift. Structurally, what justifies it? Let's take Rashomon and, uh, a story on this site. Rashomon basically jumps from 3P to 1P and back because it's framed as a trial. Each shift in perspective is accompanied by a shift in testimony. In a story with a legal/trial framing, we might expect scenes in the courtroom to be in 3P, while the stories told during testimony become 1P, another nested narrative effect. The change in perspective is caused by the structure of the story.

There's a story on this site that's good, really good. It's 1P for 99% of it. But, to my mind, it has the wrong narrator -- the MMC is the narrator but the FMC is the person experiencing growth and catharsis and making the decisions that drive the story. There are times when an absolutely critical decision has to be made and the FMC has to make it, and the MMC can't be present for or privy to what's happening. And in those instances, the author shifts to 3P close for the FMC. It means he gets to tell some of the most important parts of the story, but there's nothing to hang the shift on. It's that looking-around-corners effect, and it takes the reader out of the story to experience (or it would if they weren't there to goon).

 

[TheLobster]

A lot of the time when we talk about tropes, we're talking about framing.

Framing devices are a subset of tropes. But not every trope is a framing device; many, possibly most stories do not employ any framing nor do they require it.

the MMC is the narrator but the FMC is the person experiencing growth and catharsis and making the decisions that drive the story.

That's 1P peripheral PoV, nothing wrong about that.

there's nothing to hang the shift on.

Why there should be? Narration itself is by definition not part of the universe of the story, so why would the shift in it have to be justified in-universe?

 

[StillStunned]

I think structure matters here. I don't like the idea of going 1P -> 3P in a story.

I hate 3P interludes in a 1P story. It just screams "amateur", like the author wants the intimacy of 1P but the multiple perspectives of 3P. Or they don't trust their own ability to provide the reader with the necessary information as the 1P narrator discovers it. Either way, it's a cheap shortcut.

(I should add that "Annie's Inhibition Removal Therapy" - link in my sig - is of course a masterclass in combining 1P and 3P.)

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

Much of this tells me that focusing on what others have done may not be the best practice. If you study others, you become them and adopt their practices.

Be yourself.

Do what you do.

 

[SimonDoom]

Much of this tells me that focusing on what others have done may not be the best practice. If you study others, you become them and adopt their practices.

Be yourself.

Do what you do.

I disagree. That's not good advice with respect to anything. If you want to do something well, learn how others have done it. It doesn't matter what it is: building a bridge, performing surgery on a heart, fixing a plumbing problem, writing a story. It's all the same thing. There's so much to learn from studying how others have done things. This approach helps ensure that one's attitude toward one's craft, whatever it is, is reality-based rather than solipsistic.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

We're talking creative activities for fun, not skills based tasks that legally require certification.

 

[StillStunned]

I agree with @SimonDoom, in that seeing what others have done before can show you things you might never have thought of. Seeing where others have gone wrong saves you having to learn a harsh lesson yourself, and seeing what others have done right gives you more tools to apply.

Whether you apply them, and how, that's ultimately up to you, and that's what makes us all different as writers.

 

[EdwardsOtherSide]

I did one story entirely in the present tense (mostly to see if I could, but insert artistic blather about being in the moment).
Not my best work, but an interesting exercise.

 

[EdwardsOtherSide]

I agree with @SimonDoom, in that seeing what others have done before can show you things you might never have thought of.

The book "Steal Like an Artist" isn't just for visual arts.

 

[SimonDoom]

We're talking creative activities for fun, not skills based tasks that legally require certification.

I understand, but I believe it's all the same thing. I don't agree with the "just do it the way you want to do it and forget everybody else" perspective. I think the best way to become good at something, whatever it is, is to combine following your muse with studying the way others have done and to build upon what they've done. I think this is the way most "great" artists throughout history have done it.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

We may be talking about similar things, but at different levels.

Learning HOW to do something is not the same as studying methods to the point of trying to do them the same way.

 

[StillStunned]

Learning HOW to do something is not the same as studying methods to the point of trying to do them the same way.

I'm not sure anyone said "you have to do exactly what this or that other writer did." There's been a lot of discussion about WHAT other writers have done, and whether it was a good idea or not.

And that's a starting point for learning HOW: you study those other writers, not to imitate them but to decide for yourself which elements you want to try for yourself.

For some of us, switching between 1P and 3P isn't a shortcoming, but others will hate it until someone explains how or why it worked in a particular situation. Some of us might not care, and can point to successful authors and say, "See? It's an acceptable approach to use." The same with things like multiple 1P narrators, or present tense, or anything else: study the examples, listen to other people's opinions, then make an informed opinion.

 

[YmaOHyd]

That's 1P peripheral PoV, nothing wrong about that.

Technically no, but there is when the story can't be told without going into 3P perspective to hash out the major conflicts. Gene narrates the story of his love triangle with Tina and Louise. Gene is doing fine and having lots of sex with his girls, Tina is working through the baggage of a bad breakup, Louise is struggling with addiction. So far so good for 1P peripheral. We can observe their character growth from afar. The issue is when they then come to him and say 'yep, we're doing the poly thing now, we just had a long come-to-Jesus conversation about it that had to happen in the third person because you weren't there but it has to be on the page because it's the resolution to the only piece of tension in the entire story.'

Why there should be? Narration itself is by definition not part of the universe of the story, so why would the shift in it have to be justified in-universe?

That's not strictly true, and I gave examples in that post. There are plenty of instances in which narrative is part of the universe of the story. All story-within-a-story structures work this way.

 

[LisaMayTurner]

The oddest (or most odd) writing style that I find is that so many men cannot write in paragraphs longer then two lines and one sentence. Or even worse, just one line sentences. What has happened to human linguistic expression? My cat could write in a more complex way while coughing up furballs.

 

[StillStunned]

The oddest (or most odd) writing style that I find is that so many men cannot write in paragraphs longer then two lines and one sentence. Or even worse, just one line sentences. What has happened to human linguistic expression? My cat could write in a more complex way while coughing up furballs.

Nowadays people spend a lot of time reading online - particularly on their phones. If you want them to keep reading, and not zoning out after a paragraph or two, you need to give them lots of breaks.

Unlike with a hardcopy book that they've paid money for and therefore have some investment in that keeps them engaged, there's nothing to stop them from clicking away at the slightest hurdle. And for many of them, a wall of text that covers their entire phone screen is one of those hurdles.

 

[Djmac1031]

The oddest (or most odd) writing style that I find is that so many men cannot write in paragraphs longer then two lines and one sentence. Or even worse, just one line sentences. What has happened to human linguistic expression? My cat could write in a more complex way while coughing up furballs.

I'll fully admit to being guilty of that. Although for reasons similar to what @StillStunned pointed out.

Nowadays people spend a lot of time reading online - particularly on their phones. If you want them to keep reading, and not zoning out after a paragraph or two, you need to give them lots of breaks.

Unlike with a hardcopy book that they've paid money for and therefore have some investment in that keeps them engaged, there's nothing to stop them from clicking away at the slightest hurdle. And for many of them, a wall of text that covers their entire phone screen is one of those hurdles.

I personally dont think writing shorter paragraphs has any connection to the inability to grasp or write "human linguistic expression."

Obviously, your mileage may vary.

 

[TheLobster]

Between short paragraphs and walls of text, I’d definitely choose the former. But oneliners are excessive: I usually keep mine between two simple sentences and 90ish words, unless a punchy moment calls for more vertical space.

 

[Djmac1031]

oneliners are excessive

ill agree one liners should be reserved for impact moments. If you're gonna make one line stand on its own, there should be a reason.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

I break stuff up for visibility.

Lots of folks here aren't as young as they used to be and can't see as well.

 

[LegendInMyOwnMind]

Many of my stories have been written in the first person, looking back on the events years ago, often at the end of life. This allows a degree of omniscience without constantly having to use "later I found out" and similar phrases.

I don't know if this technique has a name, but I call it "First person omniscient in retrospect."

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

I break stuff up for visibility.

Lots of folks here aren't as young as they used to be and can't see as well.

Speak for yourself. My sense of humor is still fifteen.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

Only thing about me that's 15 is the number of years since I last worked.

 

[greenbriefs]

Speaking of framing, my first thought on reading OP's post was Frankenstein. It's outermost "frame" is a man writing letters to his sister. He meets Victor Frankenstein, who then tells his story (this is the second-level frame). And then Victor, within his own story, meets his monster a few years after creating it. Then we shift into the third level, the monster telling its story to Victor. Maybe there's a fourth level where the monster is observing a little family, and hears them talking about some lengthy drama they've had.

So in the end, we have a man telling a story of meeting another man, who's telling the story of meeting a monster, who's telling the story of some family he spied on.