# Macro Pacing by the Numbers



## Kyle R (May 30, 2014)

There are two ways of looking at a story:

1) The macro level

and

2) The micro level

At the macro level, which is where we'll be focusing on today, it's mostly construction and flow that you're looking at, in a scene by scene (or chapter by chapter) basis. It's the big, overall picture, seen from a distance. The landscape photograph.

One specific element that becomes apparent when looking at a story from this vantage point is *pacing*. How does your story fluctuate, emotionally, for the reader, as it progresses? Are intense scenes/chapters balanced out with down-tempo scenes (peaks and valleys), or do they come in random, jagged clumps? Does the level of conflict and intensity steadily rise throughout the story, or is it all over the place, like a malfunctioning theme park ride?

Readers respond to stories that are carefully crafted, the ones that build, reliably, in emotional intensity. They lean forward, their eyes bulge, they flip the pages so greedily they keep their spouses up at night. Sometimes they even morph into mythological beasts (but it takes a rare kind of author to pull that one off).

But just as willing as they are to be seduced, readers are a fickle bunch. They don't like being jarred or jostled out of rhythm too often. They like buildups and payoffs. They hate stray roads that end unceremoniously. You know that roller coaster that pulls its riders up to a summit, only to drop them off at the top and say, "Thanks, come again!" Of course you don't. Readers destroyed it, because they hate that, too.

As a writer, you can think of yourself as a pacemaker, keeping a careful eye on the pulse of your story. You don't want that sucker to flatline from an arrhythmia, do you? Not on your watch!








Your goal is to create a steady flow of peaks and valleys for your reader, a story that builds in emotional intensity all the way to its exciting, shake-the-headboards, wake-the-neighbors climax. Then you can let things to fall away smoothly, the greedy drag on a cigarette and the resulting smoke-filled, satisfied sigh.


One method for figuring out the rhythm of your story is to sketch out a brief summary of each scene, or chapter (depending on how you section your piece). You can do this before writing, as a form of plotting, or this can be done after you've already written the story.

Once you have a short summary for each part (however long you feel you need to give you a firm grasp of what's in each individual section), give each section a number based on the level of emotional intensity it achieves (or on the number you want it to achieve, if you haven't yet written it).

An easy way to do this is to rate the scenes from 1 to 10, based on the level of emotion you think your scene evokes (or will evoke) in your reader.

A* 10* means it's the most intense, balls to the wall, _make your reader grip her chair in terrified, orgasmic convulsions from your maniacal bursts of prose_ scene in your story. A *1* means the scene is so dull your reader collapses into a coma and the neighbors call 911 a week later to complain about the funny smell coming from his apartment.

Once you've labelled everything with a number, don't despair if your story is beginning to look like a kindergartner's homework assignment.








It just means you're on the right track.

When you've got your own version of a smiling goldfish, as above, you might notice certain problem areas.

For example, if you have a segment that's a 9 in intensity, and you have that scene placed early on in the story, with no other scene coming close to that level later on, then you might have a problem. Your story could very well end up feeling anticlimactic to your reader, rising up early, then kind of just petering out.

To fix this, you can either:

a) Move that scene later in the story, so ends up as the climax, rewriting things as necessary to make it all logically work

or

b) rewrite the scene to ease up a bit on the emotional level, to lower the number

or

c) rewrite the scenes that happen after it, to ramp up their own numbers in comparison


Yes, there's work involved when you encounter problems at the macro level. Sometimes, writing is work. You _do_ want your story to be as strong as you can make it, don't you? 

In the end, your readers will thank you for all your hard work by stuffing your bank account with *obscene gobs of cash*.


Take a look at your story, as rated, scene by scene (or chapter by chapter). What does the overall number chart look like?


Do you have digits all over the board, like:

9, 2, 4, 8, 2, 9, 3, 2, 1, 9, 2, *10!*, 3, 4?

(^What kind of emotional reading experience would you call _this_? A half-narcoleptic, half-epileptic seizure?)


Or do you have things progressing smoothly, with miniature peaks and valleys that continue to rise, like:

5, 6, 7... 6, 7, 8... 7, 8, 9... 8, 9, *10!*... 9, 8, 7

(^ I don't know about you, but I want to read _that_ story!)


It's no hard and fast rule, but a good way to keep your writing from slipping into the boring side is to strive to avoid too many scenes that languish below a 5.

Also, you probably only want one *10* in there (or a few, at most), to avoid desensitizing your reader.

Again, it's not a necessity, but the tried-and-true method is to have the emotional intensity steadily rise all the way through to the climax, then taper off with the denouement. 

Occasional dips here and there, especially after miniature peaks that culminate with intense scenes, can work well, just like the dips and valleys on our cardiograph above.

Lastly, don't worry about being exact. You shouldn't be striving for numerical perfection. This isn't math class. The number-system is just a tool to help us visually track the rhythm of our stories.


Who knows? Maybe you've already got this handled on an intuitive level. Or maybe you want to try it out, just out of curiosity. Whatever you decide to do with it, now you can say you're well-versed in macro-level pacing, and that you're familiar with the pacemaker (or connect-the-goldfish, or whatever you want to call it) method.

Now, quit slacking off. Get to work! :encouragement:


----------



## Bishop (May 30, 2014)

Just for a bit of fun, I did each chapter of my book with a number, and here's how she came out:

7,5,6,4,6,5,7,6,5,5,6,7,7,8,7,6,8,7,6,7,9,8,10,9,7 END. Although that last chapter kinda goes from 7 and whittles itself down closer to a 5 by the end.


----------



## Kyle R (May 30, 2014)

Looks like a page-turner, especially toward the last quarter of it!

I like that it starts with a 7 then drops back down to a 5. Classic hook. :encouragement:


----------



## shadowwalker (May 30, 2014)

My eyes crossed at the pacemaker section... :friendly_wink:

Can't help but think there's too much analysis going on in the writing world today. If my betas can read through the story and not get bored or confused, want to keep reading and feel satisfied at the end, I figure I must have gotten the pacing thing down pretty well...


----------



## Bishop (May 30, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> Looks like a page-turner, especially toward the last quarter of it!
> 
> I like that it starts with a 7 then drops back down to a 5. Classic hook. :encouragement:



I hope that it is. Adventures in space with secret government organizations and hot alien babes usually rate a little higher on the pacing scale. The trade-off is that we're not as deep or introspective as, say, Faulkner.


----------



## garza (May 30, 2014)

Kyle - Have you analysed published stories that are considered classics, such as 'Barn Burning' by Faulkner, 'To Build a Fire'  by London, or 'Harrison Bergeron' by Vonnegut?

'Twould be interesting to see how their numbers look.


----------



## Bishop (May 30, 2014)

garza said:


> Kyle - Have you analysed published stories that are considered classics, such as 'Barn Burning' by Faulkner, 'To Build a Fire'  by London, or 'Harrison Bergeron' by Vonnegut?
> 
> 'Twould be interesting to see how their numbers look.



Hah! I'm sure some of the more 'classic' stories might not warrant much of a pulse. Then again, I'm a cynic.


----------



## Sam (May 30, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> My eyes crossed at the pacemaker section... :friendly_wink:
> 
> Can't help but think there's too much analysis going on in the writing world today. If my betas can read through the story and not get bored or confused, want to keep reading and feel satisfied at the end, I figure I must have gotten the pacing thing down pretty well...



Amen. 

That's way too analytical, Kyle. For instance, virtually every person who read _Dereliction of Duty, _my first trad-published novel, couldn't put it down and were riveted on the story. I've never done any of that goldfish paint-by-numbers malarkey. I guarantee you that I can write a story that will have readers reading through their fingers, without ever adhering to anything you have said above -- because I've done it.


----------



## Tettsuo (May 30, 2014)

This exactly how I like to pace my work.  But, at the end of each chapter, I strive to have the current chapter's final "digit" to be a half digital or even an entire digit higher in tension than the previous chapter.

It didn't work always in my first book, but that's what I tried to bring to the work.

I think this generally happens automatically as the story progresses.  The closer the main character gets to fulfilling the desired goal, the greater the tension should be on the reader by default.


----------



## Tettsuo (May 30, 2014)

Sam said:


> Amen.
> 
> That's way too analytical, Kyle. For instance, virtually every person who read _Dereliction of Duty, _my first trad-published novel, couldn't put it down and were riveted on the story. I've never done any of that goldfish paint-by-numbers malarkey. I guarantee you that I can write a story that will have readers reading through their fingers, without ever adhering to anything you have said above -- because I've done it.



Not everyone can do what you've done.  I personally think Kyle's analysis helps some writers to see where the story lost people or dragged on.  I know from my beta readers and editor that my book, Sectors, the 2nd chapter dragged on for a bit and slowed the story down.


----------



## Kyle R (May 30, 2014)

*Garza*, I haven't analyzed any of the classics you mentioned with this. But I agree, the results could be interesting!

*Shadow and Sam*, I hear you both. This level of analysis certainly isn't for everyone. I chalk it up to the old maxim "one's trash is another's treasure" (and vice versa). For me, it's been invaluable with honing my current novel, so I felt like sharing it. While numbering my chapters, I spotted some pacing problems. After going back in and rewriting the problematic sections, my story's cohesion and flow definitely improved.

To each his own, right? 

*Tetsuo*, sounds like you've got it down. A continuous journey of rising tension. Hard to go wrong with that! And yes, I agree, sometimes this happens on its own. :encouragement:

Sometimes, though, a writer breaks the rhythm and the story suffers because of it. Especially if they aren't aware that pacing and rhythm is even an issue.


Whatever the system (be it numbers, intuition, beta readers, or ancient voodoo), this is really just, in my opinion, another way to see if your story's arrangement is optimal. Sometimes there are irregularities that stand out, imperfections on a tabletop that need to be sanded down or filled in. 

The numbers are merely a quick way to identify possible problem areas. :encouragement:


----------



## stormageddon (May 30, 2014)

Ideally, one would combine numbers, intuition, beta reading and ancient voodoo. I have it on good authority that that's how Tolkien did it.

Anyway, not only is this a pretty interesting idea, I think I'm going to find it a really useful thing to have in the back of my head in future writing. I always worry about messing up pacing, but never considered that it could be tackled logically - until now  Thanks, Kyle!

And Sam,


Sam said:


> Amen.
> 
> That's way too analytical, Kyle. For instance, virtually every person who read _Dereliction of Duty, _my first trad-published novel, couldn't put it down and were riveted on the story. I've never done any of that goldfish paint-by-numbers malarkey. I guarantee you that I can write a story that will have readers reading through their fingers, without ever adhering to anything you have said above -- because I've done it.


Any tips you'd be willing to share on keeping a reader hooked? I would just buy your book, but I'm poor v.v


----------



## Sam (May 30, 2014)

stormageddon said:


> And Sam,
> 
> Any tips you'd be willing to share on keeping a reader hooked? I would just buy your book, but I'm poor v.v



Yeah, one. 

Write thrillers.


----------



## Nickleby (May 30, 2014)

I put together a similar system to find out why my WIP seemed to be dragging. I called it a Ratchet Graph, because you want to keep the reader's interest ratcheted up as high as possible. The idea was that exposition and character downtime let the ratchet slip down, action and conflict turn it up, and that level has to increase on what the OP calls the macro level (of course it fluctuates on the micro level).

This type of scheme isn't meant to write the story for you, just show you where you might want to shift some scenes around or tweak them. A beginning writer will probably overestimate the "pacing level" anyway, so this tool (like any other) is only as good as the person using it.


----------



## Morkonan (May 30, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> ....An easy way to do this is to rate the scenes from 1 to 10, based on the level of emotion you think your scene evokes (or will evoke) in your reader....



While I do agree that one can do this, I don't believe it is "easy."  One can, of course, "rate" the... "excitement?" level as one interprets it, but there may be some difficulties - It's fairly arbitrary. For instance, if I've failed to build up the Reader's empathy for a character, no amount of harrowing encounters is going to effect "pacing." As a matter of fact, an entire chapter devoted towards a dull character's escape attempts from a demonic librarian isn't going to be exciting. If anything, I should have probably change the narrator's bias to one in favor of the librarian catching their dinner...

BUT, I absolutely agree that a Writer examining their story from a pacing perspective is very important. You don't want three dull chapters, back-to-back, of info-dump and non-events clogging up the Reader's pipes. There's only so much wondrous expectation the Reader is going to enjoy allowing to simmer on the back-burner. Even if you're not following up on the main storyline, you've got to have something "happen." The whole story is just a bunch of "something happenings", anyway, hopefully with a "cause" connected to wind it all up, neatly.

It may be worth looking at this from the viewpoint of interpreting each chapter using a set of standards that are not based on "interpretation" of what is "evoked" from a Reader. So, for instance, one might grade each chapter on whether or not new, plot-specific, information is revealed, if a subplot appears, if there is "action" or a "threat" is revealed, if a "goal" is achieved or a new "barrier" discovered, etc.. 

A recent book I read comes to mind. Within, there are several different subplots and some are necessary to complete before certain elements of the story can reasonably continue. For instance, the protagonist must secure the assistance of an ally. To do that, they must complete a task that is, seemingly, unrelated to the plot. Once this task is completed, the protagonist will have the assistance of the ally during their attempts to overcome the obstacles that are preventing them from achieving their goal and winding up the plot. What I noticed in myself, as I read these portions, is that, while excitement was "evoked" during the protagonist's attempts to secure the services of the ally, once that was achieved, no amount of daring-do mattered - I needed a period of relative stability to digest the events and to appreciate what their effect would be when the protagonist proceeded along the main plot. But, I didn't get that... I was forced to rattle on, bits and pieces of the story that I should have been allowed to savor fluttering around me as I tried to hang on. In short - Dull parts have their place, too. (Though, I absolutely agree that they should never be "dull", only comparatively so.)

Most methods that involve measuring the evolution of a story involve rising and falling "action." This is a bit different from measuring the "excitement" the writer is attempting to evoke. In general, I think it's a good method for attempting to quantify something about a chapter.

Here's an interesting plot/story-development outline - 

http://www.sarawilsonetienne.com/wp.../06/6-30-10-Story-Arc-Diagram-w-Subplots1.gif (Ignore the writer's commentary on the page, if you trackback to it. Just using the graphic as an example.)

So, let's say we go through this process. We draw a bunch of arcs all over the place that are not "arbitrary", but, instead, simply pay attention to story-telling mechanics. OK, we go through all of that and then we find out that in a few chapters, none of the arcs are developed at all and there are no resolutions or subplot entries. Hmmm... So, we go back and take a look at "Rising and Falling Action" in our story.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sf-_PBJDo...YvDIdBQTI/s1600/Three+Act+Structure+Final.jpg

(Again, ignore the writer's comments regarding three-act plays. I'm just using the pic to illustrate a concept.)

So, we see that in two of these "suspect" chapters that don't seem to have any story mechanic developments within them and, instead, they're devoted towards "action." There are threats and minor-obstacles presented that the characters are encountering and, while they don't move towards plot or subplot resolution, they're necessary action bits that are enjoyable romps. OK, those two chapters are fine, then, and we don't have to worry too much about them, at least relative to this short analysis.

But, using this process, we find a chapter that has neither any story-telling mechanics that are demonstrated (plot revelation, subplots, new characters, character building, revelations, etc..) nor does it contain any "action" in order to sustain the momentum that we're concerned about. Now we know where our problem chapters might be. And, we know that if we've used other chapters in ways to build up to this problem chapter that qualifies as a GNDN pipe (Goes Nowhere, Does Nothing.. Trekkies will get the reference  ), then those efforts have been wasted and we need to go back and "Fix" those chapters, as well.

It's not an "excitement" gauge, it's a way to score chapters in less arbitrary ways and manage to gain something of use by doing so. Again, I agree that pacing is important, I just don't think "excitement" is, necessarily, the way to judge that. It could be, but I think something that relies less on interpretation and more on somewhat quantifiable story-telling issues might be, in the end, easier and more accurate.

A good article you've written, nonetheless for my slight disagreement. I think that if one examines their story intuitively, paying attention to their own standards for evoking responses in a Reader, one can glean some useful information. It's just not always "easy."


----------



## shadowwalker (May 30, 2014)

I guess I just see so many new(er) writers getting all caught up in "systems" and technical jargon discussions that they never get their book off the ground. Or if they do, they're not really readable because of trying to make sure they've got all the right ingredients in all the correct measures.


----------



## Tyler Danann (May 30, 2014)

The design looks quite elaborate but the plunging portion (from 10 onwards to 17) is normally where I start to wrap up.

I do it in the classic - 

Setting the Scene
_Rising_
Conflict
_Rising_
Challenges
_Rising_
Climax
_Falling_
Resolution


----------



## Sam (May 30, 2014)

I can never understand why so many writers want to complicate things. Writing a novel is easy. Yes, it is, but the reason why many aspiring writers starting out can't manage to write past chapter one is because of thinking they need to follow a road map. *Chapter one - conflict. Chapter two - challenges. Chapter three - **conflict. *Why would anyone want to write like that? To each his own, I get it, but I've never seen the value in condensing novels to formula. It's like self-professed expert scholars who analyse the classics and pull themes and morals from thin air to suit equally thin arguments. None of them have ever written a novel in their life, but they know more about them than a writer who's written any number of them. 

I don't like putting up roadblocks where none are necessary. How do you keep the reader's attention? You write a riveting story. How do you write a riveting story? By reading riveting stories. 

_Quod erat demonstrandum. _


----------



## Morkonan (May 30, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> I guess I just see so many new(er) writers getting all caught up in "systems" and technical jargon discussions that they never get their book off the ground. Or if they do, they're not really readable because of trying to make sure they've got all the right ingredients in all the correct measures.



I think one of the problems is "interpretation." A writer sees all these graphs and systems and such and then attempts to apply them to their work. But, in the end, not one of those fancy systems has a darn thing to do with "Writing a Story." If a writer finds them helpful, fine. But, more often than not, I think people put too much weight on them and end up interpreting their "results" in a way that's just not helpful in furthering the process of actually "writing." Sure, it could be, but if you already know how to properly interpret such a system and apply what you've learned from it towards writing your story, you don't need the system in the first place...


----------



## stormageddon (May 30, 2014)

Sam, for some, this is a way of simplifying things rather than complicating them. You seem to be one of those people with an innate talent at pacing/plotting etc, whereas I have an innate talent for getting everything wrong. I don't take these discussions as gospel, but they are very helpful in teaching one how to quickly and easily identify a problem, or affirm that none exists.

For me, that's simpler than fretting over a perceived, unidentified "wrongness" in my work that refuses to be solved. For you, it won't even enter into the equation, because you won't have screwed up your pacing in the first place, and you appear to be blessed with an enviable level of self-confidence.



> I don't like putting up roadblocks where none are necessary.


I see it more as mapping out the best route. I know where I want to go, but not how best to get there, and there are so many options it makes my head spin.



> How do you write a riveting story? By reading riveting stories.


I've read thousands, and I still suck. I don't know how to extract the essence of what makes a story riveting, so I turn to others who can for help. And it's not for lack of trying - I've passed the 60 000 word mark twice, and I still don't know what I'm doing  but I am, through the benevolence of the beautiful members of this forum, beginning to learn.


----------



## Sam (May 30, 2014)

Self-confidence, might I point out, built and earned from hours upon hours of trial and error interspersed with fleeting moments of self-doubt and personal recrimination. I am where I am today for two reasons: never giving up, and having the courage to make mistakes. You will struggle to write a riveting story without first knowing how to write a mundane one. I have the ability to pace a novel not from any innate talent, but from getting it horribly wrong the first few times and learning from those errors. The only innate talent I possess is my imagination. The rest of it is all hard work and perseverance. 

That's another thing I'll never understand: how some writers think they can write great novels from the start. Did Michael Jordan play basketball the same way when he was 18 as opposed to when he won his first title at 28? No, he had to put in hour after hour at the practice gym to hone his skills. He had to learn defeat the hard way, at the hands of the Detroit Pistons, before he became the greatest to ever play the game. It won't come to you. You've got to put in the work.


----------



## Kyle R (May 30, 2014)

Morkonan said:
			
		

> I agree that pacing is important, I just don't think "excitement" is, necessarily, the way to judge that. It could be, but I think something that relies less on interpretation and more on somewhat quantifiable story-telling issues might be, in the end, easier and more accurate.
> 
> A good article you've written, nonetheless for my slight disagreement. I think that if one examines their story intuitively, paying attention to their own standards for evoking responses in a Reader, one can glean some useful information. It's just not always "easy."



You make a good point, Mork, and some great insights, too! But, just to point out, I never once used the term "excitement" in the OP. Only "emotional intensity", which, to be fair, is nearly synonymous, but not completely.

A tear-jerker moment, with our character kneeling beside her father's gravestone, for example, may not be exciting, but it likely will be high on the emotional scale.

But yes, I agree with your overall point: measuring these things can be both tricky and abstract. Perhaps "easy" wasn't the best word choice there. 

(Just thought of a fun (tongue-in-cheek) way to gauge things: the louder the soundtrack would swell, if this were a movie scene, the higher the emotional intensity likely is! :icon_cheesygrin


----------



## Kyle R (May 30, 2014)

KyleColorado said:
			
		

> Once you've labelled everything with a number, don't despair if your story is beginning to look like a kindergartner's homework assignment.






Tyler Danann said:


> The design looks quite elaborate but the plunging portion (from 10 onwards to 17) is normally where I start to wrap up.



Oh, no!

*The fish picture is purely there as a joke, an example of a kindergartner's "connect the dots" assignment.

*It's not meant to represent anything dealing with the process of pacing. (Neither is the cardiograph image, either).

(Funny, though, how numbers 1 through 17 on the fish *do* kind of resemble a rising-conflict map of the three-act structure... )


----------



## stormageddon (May 30, 2014)

Sam, I didn't mean to imply that wasn't the case, I phrase things very badly when attempting to be concise and looking back think I sounded quite dismissive. I have a great deal of respect for you, though I know that is rarely apparent when we communicate 

Genius as I am, I forgot innate means inborn. Simply meant it comes naturally to you and not to me. Did not mean to say you didn't work hard and tirelessly for that to be the case.

I suppose here my impatience comes into play. I've been writing "seriously" for...seven years? Six? I forget. By 14, I could write a decent young adult piece, with slightly iffy grammar. At some point, I started aiming at adults, and by 17, had maxed out what I could learn under my own steam, so found my way here (because I was terrible). At 18, I feel like I could write something publishable and mildly awesome if I put every last brain cell in my head to it, but then, I'm 18, so I'm pretty sure I'm delusional. Still, delusions do wonders for one's motivation.

I don't know how long you've been writing, only that it's a lot longer than me, and that through your experience, you have gained a lot of knowledge and insight that I may not have for decades to come. A decade is a very long time, particularly when you have yet to see even two. And so, impatience. I want to be brilliant as soon as possible, and so I leech off the knowledge and insight of those with the experience that I do not yet have. That's not to say I don't put the work in, or am not willing to. Only that I intend to speed my journey to brilliance along as much as I can  I feel like this is beginning to sound morally reprehensible, somehow...

To end this ramble, you've seen what I'm like in my posts here. I lose track, make no sense, insult, and generally make a fool of myself in most of the things I say, usually entirely obliviously until someone points it out. I'm not as bad in my writing, for the sole reason that I have a better idea of what to look for, and a large part of that knowledge has been garnered from the advice of others. Maybe with a few more years under my belt, these things will start to come naturally but until then...I am a leech.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (May 31, 2014)

> Once you have a short  summary for each part (however long you feel you need to give you a firm  grasp of what's in each individual section), give each section a number  based on the level of emotional intensity it achieves (or on the number  you want it to achieve, if you haven't yet written it).



Kyle, wouldn't this number be entirely subjective to feelings of the writer him/herself? 

The same emotions stirred in the writer may or may not be stirred in the reader. There may be an entirely different emotional reaction from reader to reader as well.

I'm with shadowwalker. I think, sometimes, there is way too much analysis in the writing world. It's like everyone is tryingto find the "secret formula" for success, and instead, keep drawing themselves away from the writing instincts.

I know I don't write perfect prose. But I think I tell a pretty doggone good story without a "paint by numbers" approach. It may, and probably does, work for some writers. For myself, I can't imagine it doing anything but filling my head with a bunch of stuff I don't really need. 

I think a writer who has read a good enough number of books (number being entirely subjective, of course) has probably gleaned enough information on what makes for a good book and what doesn't, to be able to figure out the pace without going to the math books.

Just my two cents.


----------



## Sam (May 31, 2014)

stormageddon said:


> Sam, I didn't mean to imply that wasn't the case, I phrase things very badly when attempting to be concise and looking back think I sounded quite dismissive. I have a great deal of respect for you, though I know that is rarely apparent when we communicate
> 
> Genius as I am, I forgot innate means inborn. Simply meant it comes naturally to you and not to me. Did not mean to say you didn't work hard and tirelessly for that to be the case.
> 
> ...



I didn't take any offence to anything you said, Storm. I was merely making the point that how I learned to pace was a direct result of getting everything horribly wrong with my first two novels, figuring out what happened and how I could rectify it, and applying that new-found knowledge to the next one. It wasn't something that existed in me from the first moment I sat down to write. I had to put in the hours to get to that point. 

I can see how that could be terrifying for someone still in their teens. When I was your age, I wanted to know everything as well. I wanted to become great overnight, but that quickly dissipated when I got feedback from the first person to ever read my work. It was the kind of humbling moment that a person can handle one of two ways: give up, or work even harder to prove the person wrong. I chose the latter. Had I not, I don't know where I'd be today. So, by all means, leech. Learn everything you can from people with experience. That's an admirable way of approaching it. It shows that you're grounded and know that you need help. But no matter how much you leech, or for how long, you still have to put the work in order to make that knowledge count.


----------



## Kyle R (May 31, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> Kyle, wouldn't this number be entirely subjective to feelings of the writer him/herself? The same emotions stirred in the writer may or may not be stirred in the reader. There may be an entirely different emotional reaction from reader to reader as well.
> 
> I'm with shadowwalker. I think, sometimes, there is way too much analysis in the writing world. It's like everyone is tryingto find the "secret formula" for success, and instead, keep drawing themselves away from the writing instincts.
> 
> I know I don't write perfect prose. But I think I tell a pretty doggone good story without a "paint by numbers" approach. It may, and probably does, work for some writers. For myself, I can't imagine it doing anything but filling my head with a bunch of stuff I don't really need.


You make some good points, Bow.

Yes, we can't predict how every reader will react to our scenes, emotionally. We can, though, know what we're aiming for, as the writer. 

I know that a scene where a main character of mine character dies is meant to be more emotional than a scene where that main character is first being introduced. So I can number those two scenes accordingly, one being obviously higher than the other on the emotional scale... and so on. 

Like eating an elephant—one bite at a time.

_Regarding the search for a writing "secret"_: I can understand the desire to find the holy grail in anything we do. Though, this isn't meant as a secret, merely a tool to help analyze one's pacing issues, if one wishes to use it.

_Regarding this as a writing system:_ This doesn't have to be a writing system or paint by numbers way of constructing a story.

For me, I use this *after* writing the story, not before. It's when I'm in the "Now how do I make sure this story I've written is the best it can possibly be?" stage. The part where I'm kicking the tires, checking the suspension, doing the test drives. 

The editing, rewriting, and/or revision stage is where I find this most helpful.



			
				T.S.Bowman said:
			
		

> I think a writer who has read a good enough number of books (number being entirely subjective, of course) has probably gleaned enough information on what makes for a good book and what doesn't, to be able to figure out the pace without going to the math books.


Generally, I agree with you here. 

But what about the exceptions? What about the individuals who struggle with pacing problems? What then?

What if there were an exercise they could try, a way to map out the pacing of their story, so they can identify any problem areas? :encouragement:


----------



## Nickleby (May 31, 2014)

Not every writer is proficient at every skill required by writing. You may do an excellent job at description, while I may lean on my world building. If you came up with a scheme for describing people and places, I might try it until I gained the confidence to do it my own way. And isn't that the way we learn anything? You borrow and adapt the schemes that others use until you have a scheme of your own. We all follow rules, even if we can't articulate them or codify them.

As Sam points out, you have to try a lot of things before you find the things that work for you. Inevitably, you will find that some (and even most) things don't work for you. It doesn't mean those things are completely useless, since they do work for the person you got them from. It doesn't mean you're not a good writer, it just means those things don't work for you in particular.

What counts is the end product, the stuff you create. How you get there is irrelevant.


----------



## Morkonan (May 31, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> You make a good point, Mork, and some great insights, too! But, just to point out, I never once used the term "excitement" in the OP. Only "emotional intensity", which, to be fair, is nearly synonymous, but not completely.
> 
> A tear-jerker moment, with our character kneeling beside her father's gravestone, for example, may not be exciting, but it likely will be high on the emotional scale.
> 
> ...



Those are good points as well and you're right about movie tracks, too. 

What are the "emotionally intense" moments in a story? Part of my point was that they rely on interpretation and the writer's ability to prepare the ground. We know what is "intended" as a writer, but we may fall short of achieving it, blindly refusing to acknowledge that our blockbuster/tearjerker scene isn't quite what we're making it up to be.

I suppose that's just a general failure-point of writing - It could be applied to any sort of "process" review. If I, for instance, "fail" at doing something that is required by whatever standards I'm measuring myself against, no amount of measurement is going to yield credible results. So, if I "Fail" at character-building, no amount of measuring "emotional intensity" is going to matter, since the failure-point destroys that. And, since I created that failure, I'm not likely to realize how badly I've screwed up, even after a hundred measurements. 

Is there a way to take a more quantitative approach, outside of the realm of "interpretation", and then apply it to "macro-pacing?" It could be as simple as counting how many verbs you've got in a chapter...(Note: This sort of thing has been discussed by writers for a long time, so it's not exactly a new idea. But, it is still worth discussing.)


----------



## Tyler Danann (May 31, 2014)

Sam said:


> I can never understand why so many writers want to complicate things. Writing a novel is easy. Yes, it is, but the reason why many aspiring writers starting out can't manage to write past chapter one is because of thinking they need to follow a road map. *Chapter one - conflict. Chapter two - challenges. Chapter three - **conflict. *Why would anyone want to write like that? To each his own, I get it, but I've never seen the value in condensing novels to formula. It's like self-professed expert scholars who analyse the classics and pull themes and morals from thin air to suit equally thin arguments. None of them have ever written a novel in their life, but they know more about them than a writer who's written any number of them.
> 
> I don't like putting up roadblocks where none are necessary. How do you keep the reader's attention? You write a riveting story. How do you write a riveting story? By reading riveting stories.
> 
> _Quod erat demonstrandum. _


I agree, while I wouldn't rigidly follow any formula it's just nice to have a rough blueprint to go off, as a reference you might say...


----------



## dvspec (Jun 7, 2014)

> A* 10* means it's the most intense, balls to the wall, _make your reader grip her chair in terrified, orgasmic convulsions from your maniacal bursts of prose_ scene in your story. A *1* means the scene is so dull your reader collapses into a coma and the neighbors call 911 a week later to complain about the funny smell coming from his apartment.



That is freaking funny.  I love it.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Jun 8, 2014)

Hmm...since the numbers a writer gives his or her own scenes is going to be entirely subjective because they _wrote it_...

Would it not make sense, and give the writer a more accurate sense of his or her acing to have a beta reader assign the numbers?


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 8, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> Hmm...since the numbers a writer gives his or her own scenes is going to be entirely subjective because they _wrote it_...
> 
> Would it not make sense, and give the writer a more accurate sense of his or her acing to have a beta reader assign the numbers?



A beta reader would just tell him where the pacing is off...


----------



## voltigeur (Jun 8, 2014)

I want the thank Kyle for this thread. It is very helpful and uncanny in its timeliness.  I am at the stage where I am introducing Characters and the work feels slow and bogged down. I’m thinking about how to balance building empathy for characters so you do grip your seat when all hell breaks loose. 

Examples from my WIP: 

My El Salvador characters no problems. Deep in a jungle fight massacres and the ACATEL Battalion is never that far away. 

Then there are the characters in Washington DC. Who are making policy decisions and gathering intelligence reports that affect the El Salvador story line but are living normal lives. 

While I probably won’t assign numbers to my scenes Kyle’s post have helped me frame the problem.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Jun 8, 2014)

shadowwalker said:


> A beta reader would just tell him where the pacing is off...



Unless the writer asked them to?


----------



## bazz cargo (Jun 8, 2014)

My 2c.
Part of the writing has to be down to instinct, what would I as a writer like to read?  Take for instance a certain book by Sam, it starts bang in the middle of an escape scene, no time to stop and smell the coffee, you are off and breathlessly turning pages. Now this kind of gambit is as old as the hills and still works for me yet it will not be the same for other readers. 

I think this is where pansters have to watch from the sideline, if I have a story that starts with a question and ends with global changes I need to have some kind of map. Chapter by chapter, pivot points, red herrings, surprise twists, sneaky action, full- bore blood and giblets, warm and fuzzy love, lust, catastrophe, revenge, narrow clinging on by the finger nails for dear life threats and overcoming impossible odds. Everything I can shoehorn in and make germane. Mind you a lot of changes happen along the way when better ideas occur.  I'm not aiming for perfect, just to entertain. 

The plus side of reading threads like this is I get to add to my 'rule of thumb' system and avoid a total reinvention of the wheel. So a big THANK YOU to Kyle for all his help. I should point out that Sam has, along with many others,  been a great resource of ideas, hints and tips. Without WF I would never try and write a shopping list let alone a book.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 8, 2014)

T.S.Bowman said:


> Unless the writer asked them to?



Quite honestly, as someone who has beta'd a number of folks over the years, if an author asked me to do this number bit - or any analysis of this sort - I'd tell them to find someone else. It takes enough time to do a useful critique without this sort of thing added in.


----------



## shadowwalker (Jun 8, 2014)

bazz cargo said:


> I think this is where pansters have to watch from the sideline



Not sure what you mean by that. Are you inferring that a pantser cannot write a story with twists and turns and red herrings that still makes a good story? Because from personal experience I would have to disuade you of that opinion.


----------



## T.S.Bowman (Jun 8, 2014)

bazz cargo said:


> My 2c.I think this is where pansters have to watch from the sideline, if I have a story that starts with a question and ends with global changes I need to have some kind of map. Chapter by chapter, pivot points, red herrings, surprise twists, sneaky action, full- bore blood and giblets, warm and fuzzy love, lust, catastrophe, revenge, narrow clinging on by the finger nails for dear life threats and overcoming impossible odds. Everything I can shoehorn in and make germane. Mind you a lot of changes happen along the way when better ideas occur.  I'm not aiming for perfect, just to entertain.



Bazz...you would, in this example, be implying that a book written by a pantser, either cannot have any of these things, or that a pantser would be unable to write such a book without planning it out.

We are trying to entertain just as much as any other writer. I, like others, write with a style that we enjoy reading. I'm not a huge fan of Tom Clancy, but that doesn't mean, even though I am a pantser, that I couldn't write a book like one of his if I set my mind to it. Would I have to have a file to keep track of plot twists along the way..absolutely. Would I make a full blown chapter by chapter plan? Nope. The stuff I would have to go into the file would be placed there after I thought of them in the process of writing the book.

I would argue that there is no time when a pantser is relegated to watching "from the sidelines."


----------



## bazz cargo (Jun 8, 2014)

> I would argue that there is no time when a pantser is relegated to watching "from the sidelines."


I stand corrected. It was me thinking, not me being certain.


----------

