Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/45603
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

> I'm unsure if it's meaningful, if it has enough depth. How do I determine this?

You might start by asking yourself: _what kind of meaningfulness or depth am I looking for?_

With very few exceptions, a fictional work is at heart a _story_ about a _character_. Really good novels, of course, go well beyond being just a story: they have a _thematic_ meaningfulness (the work invites the reader to consider the issues raised), or a depth of _characterisation_ (one or more characters are complex in nature, richly described, or deeply examined), or a complexity of _plot_ (e.g. multiple sub-plots meaningfully woven into the main storyline; or a frame story; or a non-linear plot line), or an artistry in the language itself. The truly great works of literature generally tick multiple boxes.

But are you planning your first novel to be a truly great work of literature? Most of us would settle for far less on debut: for example, _simply getting published_ is a tremendous tick of approval, because it means an editor thinks your novel has sufficient appeal that people you don't know will want to buy it.

So perhaps when you ask yourself about meaningfulness and depth, you might first consider whether any of the elements - theme, characterisation, plot, language - actually require more work. For example, not every novel needs thematic depth: in fact, most of the novels in the New Releases section of your local book store just tell an entertaining story, with minimal thematic content. Teenage Leigh tracks down a fugitive; Jane falls in love with Larry; Ruh-el finds the nor-dragon's weakness and saves her village; Murray finally gets a job, but not the one he was looking for.

Add a **theme** if you will: Leigh's "voices in the head" turns out not to be a mental health disability but a paranormal gift; replace "Larry" with "Fatima" and set it in a small-minded town.

Or is it depth of **characterisation** you feel is lacking? Are your primary characters underdeveloped: do they have clear strengths and weaknesses, a past and a purpose, real bodies and clothes and mannerisms? Do they _evolve_ as the plot progresses? Are your minor characters just cutouts? Is there sufficient tension between the different characters?

Instead, is it the **plot** itself that lacks depth? Are there enough twists and surprises? Are there sub-plots you can add or explore? Is the story too linear?

Or perhaps you're just telling a good old-fashioned tale, no great thematic depth, the characters are well-crafted, the plot is entertaining, but is it the **language** itself that lacks complexity? Is there insufficient variation in tone, pace, sentence structure? Is the dialogue too predictable? Are the dialogue tags too flowery? Does the linguistic cleverness of the first few chapters tail off? Is there inadequate description of setting? How often are _touch, smell or taste_ evoked?

It's easy for an emerging writer (I'm thinking of myself here!) to waver between an exuberant confidence in their own ability and a demoralising doubt in the quality of what's actually produced. Beta readers and redrafting certainly help along the way, and hopefully the above offers a useful mechanism to reassure yourself that your novel has the depth you're after (or to identify where further work is needed), but the most important task for any writer is a simple one: _write write write_.

Original score: 1