Larry Brooks is very much in favor of structure. He firmly believes this is the way to plan your novel, and I agree with him. Too many writers do wander around looking for their story while writing hundreds of pages. Where I differ with him is in his contention that knowing and using these competencies will get you published. If you don't you won't get there. Having read hundreds of novels, I can see that structure is important, but there are a great many published novels that, in my opinion, fail. Structure may be there, but they're dull, characterization is poor, and the subject matter uninteresting.
I felt that his extensive use of Dan Brown's “The Da Vinci Code” was unfortunate. I agree that Brown follows the recommended structure, but without the enticing clues and mysterious background, I don't think the book works well. Perhaps this is because I hate chase scenes with no character development. So while I enjoyed “Story Engineering,” I have some reservations about how useful structure is if you don't have excellent content and characterization.
I also felt that he short-changed organic writers. Outlining, or preparing a beat sheet is a good idea, but some people do have an intrinsic feel for story and don't do as well preparing everything up front. I think this approach has many valid suggestions for improving craft, but I also think there are other important factors. My suggestion is read the book and take what you can use. It's an experience that will make you think.
I reviewed this book as part of the Thomas Nelson Booksneeze Program.
I reviewed this book as part of the Thomas Nelson Booksneeze Program.
No comments:
Post a Comment