Is it possible that my short novel will be boring to my readers because it only has two characters and the location doesn't change?
In my story, there are two characters: a schoolgirl and a strange person with a creepy mask who gives her a tour in an art museum at night. Well, actually there is a third character; the boyfriend of the girl, but he only answers the phone at the beginning to tell her that he will come later (but never does), and she talks about him all throughout the novel.
Will this short novel (approximately 200 pages) be boring to my readers because it only has two characters, and because the whole novel is set in that art museum? Will it be better if there are more? Or should I just stick with the plot without caring about that?
These things have no bearing on whether the story is boring A boring story is boring if it fails to capture the imagina …
5y ago
From a movie/tv perspective the classic "12 Angry Men" has 12 characters (it's a jury) and never leaves the jury deliber …
7y ago
Remember there is always a journey in a story. Many writers will call this the "plot", but the two don't co-incide compe …
13y ago
I once read a book with a cast of thousands and an epic sweep that covered centuries of mythical action, bloody wars, ma …
13y ago
Why would you add extra anything if your plot doesn't need it? Most writers have trouble taking things out, and you're t …
13y ago
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/2547. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
5 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
Remember there is always a journey in a story. Many writers will call this the "plot", but the two don't co-incide compeletely.
You've put your two characters on a journey with each other through the museum. What will they encounter about themselves and each other? What will they learn? How will they react? How will they change? How will their reactions change? What about the journey you take the reader on?
Remember, too, that an art museum has all the artwork as additional "characters". If one character is giving a tour, then the art should play an important role in what happens. Or at least, that's what the tour guide is going to clearly expect.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/2565. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
From a movie/tv perspective the classic "12 Angry Men" has 12 characters (it's a jury) and never leaves the jury deliberation chamber save for the ending.
Similarly, the Deep Space 9 episode, while having to deal with SAG rules that staring actors must appear in a bulk of the episodes, it's carried by two characters and was written as a "bottle episode" which in TV Speak means it was designed to use only the existing sets so they could save money for bigger stunts in later episodes. Despite this, it's one of the best of the season because it banked on the raw emotion of the two characters.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/29953. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
These things have no bearing on whether the story is boring
A boring story is boring if it fails to capture the imagination of the reader. A complex plot with dozens of characters and a detailed expansive world won't prevent a story from being boring. Neither will a lack of these things make a story boring.
Objects and exhibits become sudo-characters
Set within a museum there will be plenty of opportunity to introduce interesting objects or exhibits. These objects will have their own backstory and meaning to the main character. Show the interactions between the MC and these objects, demonstrate their importance and value. Do this well and the object becomes a sudo-character with a story arc all of its own.
Example in fiction
The Slow Regard of Silent Things is a novella by Patrick Rothfuss set within his Kingkiller Chronicles universe. It follows the life of a single isolated character in their private world beneath the city. We only ever see things from this characters perspective, there are no other living creatures in the story. Instead we are shown the world as the character sees it, her attachment to inanimate objects and her feelings toward the various rooms she visits. As readers we develop an emotional attachment to her possessions such that the loss of one is akin to the death of a character in any other story.
This story is enhanced rather than hindered by a lack of characters and locations. By limiting the scale of the world we are forced to examine things on another level, enabling a unique and fascinating tale. I see no reason the story you are writing couldn't evoke the same feeling.
0 comment threads
I once read a book with a cast of thousands and an epic sweep that covered centuries of mythical action, bloody wars, magical happenings and whatnot.
I read about four chapters and gave up because:
- The characters were lame.
- The dialogue was stilted.
- The plot was generic.
- The infodumps were deep, long and seemingly without relevance.
I read another story about a man dreaming he was climbing to the top of a mountain, where he promptly fell off. That's about all there was to it.
It gripped me from beginning to end.
Anything's possible. It's the story that matters.
This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/2549. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
Why would you add extra anything if your plot doesn't need it? Most writers have trouble taking things out, and you're trying to stuff things in? We should all have such troubles. ;)
0 comment threads
0 comment threads