Post History
If you are worried that it is too complicated, it is probably too complicated. Not there there is not a place for narrative innovation in literature, but the basics are the readers want to be immer...
Answer
#4: Attribution notice removed
by
System
·
2020-01-03T20:41:50Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24355 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T05:32:07Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/24355 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
System
·
2019-12-08T05:32:07Z (almost 5 years ago)
If you are worried that it is too complicated, it is probably too complicated. Not there there is not a place for narrative innovation in literature, but the basics are the readers want to be immersed in the story and narrative trickery is likely to pull them out of the story. There is an old saying in moviemaking that if you notice the cinematography, it is bad cinematography. Once you notice the cinematography, you are engaged at the technical level of movie making, not the literary level of storytelling. The same goes for narrative technique in prose. If the reader notices the narrative technique, it is probably bad narrative technique. And if it is complex narrative technique, the reader is probably going to notice, unless it is done really really well. For an example of it done well, see No Country for Old Men. But even there, you definitely notice. But Cormac McCarthy is a genius and can get away with it. Most of us should probably stick to trying to tell an immersive story using the simplest narrative techniques we can.
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2016-08-28T03:19:32Z (about 8 years ago)
Original score: 2