Statute of Limitations

This week I had an opportunity to comment on a friend's review in which I expressed being loathe to place rules on a novelist. An ironic position since at the time I decided to become one, I placed three on myself. So as I close on completing my sixth novel in eight years, I thought it would make a good post to, in hindsight, examine these self-imposed limitations.

First, I made a promise to remain true to the story. At the time, I had no idea that pledge placed me at the center of two literary debates, raging to this day. Before defining what I mean by 'story', let's begin by seeing what one literary critic has to say on the subject of story vs plot.

"Apart from the distinction between the two levels story and discourse , which is part of structuralist terminology, there is an older tradition which differentiates between story and plot. The basic difference between story and plot was pointed out by Aristotle, who distinguishes between actions in the real world and units that are selected from these and arranged in what he calls mythos..."

Okaaay, we are not going to dance on the head of that intellectual pin. Let's leave this University of Freiburg English professor to continue toiling in anonymity. We need look no further than the response all of us desire. "Wow. That was a great story." No one ever says, "Wow. That was a great plot."

'Story' belongs to the reader. It is the sum total from beginning to end of his or her reading experience. The emotional rollercoaster and moments of learning. The sense of awe and wonder, the quiet reflection at reaching 'The End' and having glimpsed another world.

'Plot' belongs to the author and when done well is always invisible to the reader. It is the methods, techniques and, of course, the well-crafted prose that draws the reader into a fictional reality. Story is strategic. Plot is tactical.

'Story' for me, therefore, took priority over everything and thus whatever it demanded, I remained true to regardless of personal preference or bias. Unbeknownst to me, however, the position thrust me into another literary imbroglio: plot vs character. If story held sway, and plot served story, where in the pecking order did character belong?

Before anyone gasps in horror at the prospect of my hurling character under the bus, fear not. Character does not compromise my first rule to remain true to the story. Indeed, it serves my purpose. To the extent characters are well-defined, well-individualized, and credible to the reader, the story is well-served.

But

Assuming every novel we write will not be brilliant, a good plot can carry average characters. Good characters cannot carry an average plot.

Now before I continue with the next two limitations, a little context is in order. Dread accompanies my trolling through the Internet's literary nooks and crannies because agents are fond of posting lists comprised of the worst Query Letters they've ever received. I refuse to read them. Seven years ago, I sent the following three-sentence email to over a hundred agents without knowing Query Letters even existed.

"Hi. My name is Rafael and I've just finished my first novel, The Sixth Ape. Would you like to read it?"

Despite the abject naivete at the time, my instincts were on solid ground. As part of the commitment to become a novelist, I vowed to never violate the Laws of Physics. It forced me to do my homework and learn how to create fictional worlds that did not rely on magic and miracles to advance the plot. In fact, it made my second novel, Donnadio (that's an Italian word, EG), possible. Needing a civilization-ending apocalyptic event to establish the story's premise, the discipline gained prevented me from giving in to the shop-worn tropes of nuclear holocaust, world war, meteor strike, or global pandemic. One free kindle cover to the first one who can guess what it is. And, of course, though my stories are always mixed genre, fantasy is sadly not one of them.

Finally, I resolved to not be the author of anything that re-wrote history. My life-long fascination with the subject has been a tremendous help in getting me past stubborn plot points. There is nothing I can imagine that hasn't already occurred somewhere or sometime in history. Indeed, across the millennia humans have had every opportunity to create truths stranger than fiction. But though I won't rewrite it, I don't hesitate to, umm, embellish it.

In my fourth novel, They Cried Wolf, the protagonist, an assassin in the employ of the President of the United States, happens to be a very long-lived lycanthrope (no, werewolves do not violate the Laws of Physics).

This made for great back-story as he then became one of the pirates General Andrew Jackson identified as my "hellish banditti" during the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812. At a crucial point in the fight, the young swashbuckler deprived the British of much-needed leadership by shooting one of their generals dead. The facts are historically accurate but the battle's chroniclers never identified the shooter and therefore had no idea he was my protagonist, Diego Constance.

And with that, the plot has come to an end. Did you enjoy the story?

As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.