It took me a minute to catch the PoV shift you spoke about, but I think I see it now. Presenting the 50+ guards before John reacts seems to be a shift from John's point of view to some sort of omniscient point of view.
There were definitely a few things about that first example that just bothered me, another of which is suspense, even if only for a moment. Having him swear in reaction before presenting what he's reacting to seems to increase tension a little bit, at least in this case. Thanks again for you willingness to answer all of my newbie questions :) Regards, Nat On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Raymond E. Feist <[email protected]>wrote: > > On Apr 6, 2012, at 12:11 PM, Nat Russo wrote: > > > Hi Ray, > > > > I'm still merrily revising my first draft (ok...sometimes > not-so-merrily). I noticed something in my writing that I wanted to ask > you about, and it deals with the subject of cause and effect. Paraphrasing > a book on writing that I recently read, the author suggested you should > *never* reverse the two, as this could cause some confusion in the reader. > I hate words like "always" and "never" when it comes to stuff like this, > though. > > > > Here's a brief example of effect following cause, as the author of the > book I alluded to above would do it. > > > > ---Effect following Cause--- > > "Bells began to ring throughout the city, indicating the alarm had been > raised. John knew he wouldn't be alone for long. As he rounded the corner > he got his first glimpse of the docks to the south. At least fifty guards > lined the street between him and his destination. There would be no way to > break through their line. > > John swore." > > --------------------- > > > > Yeah, that works and everything. You see the cause [oh crap there's a > bunch of guards] before the effect [John swears]. But I find myself > preferring the following in this situation: > > > > --Cause following Effect-- > > "Bells began to ring throughout the city, indicating the alarm had been > raised. John knew he wouldn't be alone for long. As he rounded the corner > he got his first glimpse of the docks to the south. > > John swore. > > At least fifty guards lined the street between him and his destination. > There would be no way to break through their line." > > --------------------- > > > > The latter version seems more...I don't know...cinematic? You see John > swear [the effect] a moment before you know why [the cause], but this > doesn't seem jarring to my ear. In fact, it reminds me of the countless > times I've seen such a sequence in action/suspense films. (But maybe > that's the problem? It's cliche?) > > > > I'm just curious about your take on this. Is this a situation of > "whatever sounds best to you", or a "for the love of God, man, never do > that!"...or somewhere in between? > > > > Thanks, > > Nat > > > > -- > > Sent from my Crappy Laptop (tm) using a poor excuse for a web browser. > > > > > > Trust your gut. > > The first is flawed, because you've lost your point-of-view. Your > character's point-of-view correctly views the causality. > > EVERYTHING must serve the reader. Break rules to make it serve if you > need to. > > Best, R.E.F. > ---- > www.crydee.com > > Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by > stupidity. > > > > > > > > -- Sent from my Crappy Laptop (tm) using a poor excuse for a web browser.
