How much info?

[Mouse]

First of all, a quick question before I forget. Further or farther? Depends on the context, right? Farther is for real distance and further is for uh... that other sort of distance. For example: I don't want to argue further. I don't want to walk any farther.

That's right, yes? I'm starting to doubt it as I've just seen 'further' used where I'm pretty sure it should've been 'farther' in an actual proper published book.

Anyway, that's not why I started this thread. Some background: I have nine POV characters in the novel I'm working on at the mo. The novel is the third and final book of the YA fantasy I'm self-publishing, then I'm going to do other things.

The action in the book takes place in two different destinations - stuff is happening in a kingdom and more stuff is happening on a journey. Now, the people doing the journey are now splitting up. I've got one character staying behind in a city because he's too ill to continue on. I've got three characters (one being the main POV character) leaving the city to finish what they're supposed to be doing (their 'quest' if you will), and then I've got another POV character who's just ran out on them and has gone AWOL in the city.

My question: Should I follow the POV character in the city and show exactly what he's doing? Or should I forget about him until he catches up with my main POV character again and just have him tell her what he's been up to?

The thing is, I don't want there to be too much going on. Because there's still stuff happening with POV characters back at the kingdom while all this is going on. My original idea was to have matey go missing in the city, then show up later in the story and tell my main character why he ran out on her.

I've revealed that this character who goes missing is wanted in this city for murder, but I've not said anything else about that. (It's in critiques here.) So would readers be annoyed that I didn't show him resolving that? Or would they be satisfied just hearing his explanation?

I hope all that made sense! I have a serious headache.

 

[The Judge]

Further/farther -- according to my dictionary

...where the sense is 'at, to, or by a greater distance', there is no difference in meaning and both are equally correct. Further is a much commoner word, though, and is in addition used in various abstract and metaphorical contexts, for example referring to time, in which it would be unusual to substitute farther eg without further delay; have you anything further to say?

So further can be used anywhere, but farther is best reserved for real distance.

As to chummy who goes AWOL -- I think it depends on what he does. If he spends the entire time hiding in disused basements then no, don't bother showing it. If he does great and stirring deeds, then yes, show him, even though you've got lots of other POVs all over the place. If he does a lot of skulking and only minor and not-particularly-stirring deeds, you're in a quandary! Me, I'd probably go for showing, anyway.

 

[Colbey Frost]

If it's dramatic then it could work to just leave it. Then we instantly know that he got away when they rejoin. Almost getting caught sort of thing, so they want to know he's ok. That way when they do find out, they're happy just to know he's healthy and been able to catch up?

I think that's what you meant, please correct me if what I said is utter tripe.

 

[Mouse]

Thanks, TJ. Glad I'm not going nuts with the further/farther thing!

I think he will be doing the not-particularly-stirring deeds. Thing is, dragons are starting to arrive over the city and I thought he's in the perfect place to show all the devastation. Although, the dragons have just come from the kingdom - where we've seen the devastation they've caused there through these other POVs, so... Gah!

Christian, thanks. That's the sort of lines I was thinking along, yeah. See, he's just run out after sleeping with the main POV girly (yes this is YA, I don't show them doing it) so she's really peed off, but she'll forgive him once she finds out why he left. So he's got to tell her anyway.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

If the scenes with him in the city don't show anything that hasn't been seen or explained exhaustively elsewhere, and he's not doing anything that impacts the plot, then I think (based on what you say) that you probably should cut his solo scenes and be content with allowing him a brief explanation when he reunites with the main character.

But there are other factors to consider. How exciting would his scenes be? Are the scenes much the same: just the character skulking about with minor variations? Do you need to alternate between him and the other characters to give the impression that time is passing for them without having to fill in all their boring details? Does his character change in some way because of what he's been doing?

 

[Mouse]

If the scenes with him in the city don't show anything that hasn't been seen or explained exhaustively elsewhere, and he's not doing anything that impacts the plot, then I think (based on what you say) that you probably should cut his solo scenes and be content with allowing him a brief explanation when he reunites with the main character.

But there are other factors to consider. How exciting would his scenes be? Are the scenes much the same: just the character skulking about with minor variations? Do you need to alternate between him and the other characters to give the impression that time is passing for them without having to fill in all their boring details? Does his character change in some way because of what he's been doing?

Thanks, Teresa, I think that's just confirmed what I was feeling about it. He doesn't do anything that impacts the plot, and there won't be anything that hasn't been seen/described earlier in the book with the dragons. I really don't think his scenes would be that exciting, but I'm not sure... It would be him going after his father to get him to admit stitching him up for the murder. I don't think it would change his character.

I think I was worrying about it because in book one I have a scene where two characters fight to the death. But the reader doesn't see it because the characters lock themselves in a room and I stick with the POV character on the wrong side of the door. I had a reader say to me that this was the best fight in the book and I didn't show it. (Though whether it would've still been the best fight had I shown it, I don't know.)

 

[alchemist]

An alternative to the learned points above would be to say absolutely nothing about what happened, and save that story for a spin-off/short story. Although it looks like you want rid of this story.

On that fight in a locked room, is it recommended to bring in a new POV for one scene? It feels like cheating, somehow.

 

[Mouse]

An alternative to the learned points above would be to say absolutely nothing about what happened, and save that story for a spin-off/short story. Although it looks like you want rid of this story.

A short story would be an idea... I've thought about that before for parts of the story I haven't shown.

On that fight in a locked room, is it recommended to bring in a new POV for one scene? It feels like cheating, somehow.

Oh, no, it wasn't a new POV brought it, it was from one of the main characters.

 

[JunkMonkey]

That's right, yes? I'm starting to doubt it as I've just seen 'further' used where I'm pretty sure it should've been 'farther' in an actual proper published book.

Don't assume just because it's in an actual proper published book that it's correct. I just came across 'minefields sewn with death' in a collection of Italo Calvino stories. I mean proper grown up litrichur and they still get things wrong.

 

[RJM Corbet]

I don't think 'farther' is a word that needs to be used at all. I can quite safely live the rest of my life without encountering it and be no less a person for the experience.

Re: the character: I don't know if you've already written it and are now deciding whether or not to use it? Otherwise probably just pass it over and get on with the moving story, because whatever he does while he's away doesn't seem to grab you that much?

 

[Hex]

Glad you asked about further/ farther - I'd wondered vaguely and my dictionary wasn't as helpful as The Judge's.

About the chap in the city. I'd write it and see. It does sound like a sort of exciting story - man confronts father (who has done him a terrible wrong) in city filling with dragons, struggling to come to terms with newfound love (or sex, or whatever). And then if it doesn't work as part of the main book, your writing could be the basis for a short story. It does sound like you could leave it out - I wouldn't worry about the fight-in-a-locked-room comment - sounds like a brilliant device.

 

[RJM Corbet]

You might find you need something there later, then you can write something and work it in? Or would that involve big string-pulling later so it's something you'd prefer to decide about now? It feels at this point that you'll be writing that section a bit unwillingly, if you do it now, and that will come across in the writing and you'll probably want to change it or drop it from the final draft anyway ...?

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

RJM is right. Writing it now when you are unenthusiastic about the whole idea could be a mistake. As you write the rest, something may suggest a very good reason to write those scenes, something that ties in with other parts of the story and is much better than anything you could think up at this moment, and if and when that something occurs to you it will ignite your interest.

You reluctance may simply be your subconscious mind telling you that you don't know enough yet to write those scenes. Or it could be your subconscious mind telling you that writing them at all would be a bad idea. It sounds like now might not be the right time to figure out which one it is.

 

[MstrTal]

I personally with the hold of till later crowd. I am also with the perhaps its something for a short story/ short story collection later on. Besides you never know if this character and his issues might not rear his head in the future as a stand alone book. His story and POV set within the context of the greater original series that uses said series as a starting point but then goes off someplace completely different.

 

[Anne Lyle]

I think I was worrying about it because in book one I have a scene where two characters fight to the death. But the reader doesn't see it because the characters lock themselves in a room and I stick with the POV character on the wrong side of the door. I had a reader say to me that this was the best fight in the book and I didn't show it.

Hehheh! I have a sex scene in my book that I only show through a character who accidentally eavesdrops - I had such fun with that one!

@alchemist - Mouse doesn't state that it's a new PoV. On the contrary, it sounds to me like it's an existing PoV, but she stays with that character rather than switching to one of the combatants.

 

[alchemist]

My question appears to have been misconstrued. What I meant to ask was - if Mouse were to use the POV of one of the locked-in combatants, and this was the first (and possibly only) time this POV was used, would that be considered a bit odd?

 

[The Judge]

I think I'd be very wary, alchemist. I'm pretty profligate with POVs, but if I knew I was going to have an important dramatic scene where I had to use one of two people, I'd try and make sure I'd used one of their POVs at least once in advance of that, and at least once after. A single-use POV from a spectator is a different thing, perhaps -- because we're not so involved in the action. (Not sure if that makes sense on re-reading -- I keep being interupted here.)

 

[alchemist]

Thanks, TJ. This sort of thing has been tempting me, as characters refuse to go where they're meant to, but I shall continue to resist.

 

[Mouse]

Thank you, all. Brilliant help as usual! I think I will go with the 'leave it out til later' plan. That way I can decide once everything's done whether it needs to be in there or not. In the second book I had a character stay behind at a village while the heroine heads back to her home. I didn't bring this character into it again until she called for him. When I re-wrote it, I realised I needed him in and had to weave his story all throughout the rest of the book.

Alchemist, ah I get you! Yeah, I agree with TJ on that one. Although, in my WIP I've got a character in the first couple of chapters who has a very small POV before he then gets turned into a mindless slave, but I couldn't see any way around not giving him a POV unless I went all narrator-y.