sorry if you already answered something like this, if you did i coudn't find it so: i have a fantasy story with 3 pov characters. All 3 have an important arc, one of them(say X) has a more stressful one. Problem: if i arrange the chapters so the X chapters are followed by less stressful but impactful chapters the transition is a bit off, but if i match the more stressful points of X's arc with the stressful points of the other two it feels a bit too intense to read. Any advice? Thanks in advance
My ‘multiple plots’ tag is [HERE]
I think in this case it’s going to be helpful for you to take a step back and look at the ‘shape’ of your narrative. Each of these three character arcs are progressing throughout the novel, with their own ups and downs, but you’ll want to keep in mind the flow of rising action in the story as a whole.
A Very simple illustration that you will probably have seen in school is something like this:
Generally, in conceptualising the ‘shape’ of a narrative, it will be something like this, most of the story is building up to a moment of confrontation or action, and then there is a short denouement in which the narrative issues are resolved, and the story ends.
If we were to imagine the three act structure as discussed in [THIS] post, it would look a bit like:
Overall, that same upside down checkmark shape is still there, but we can see the rudimentary ‘ups and downs’ of a narrative taking place.
If you think about your story, and your three narrative threads, you’ll probably find it helpful to map out the shape of your own story, so that you have an idea of what each part of your story would ideally be working towards.
As to your issue with the ‘stressful’ parts of the story aligning, sometimes we need high tension in the story, sometimes it is important that the different strands of the narrative all reach crisis at the same point, if it is handled well it can make for a memorable, nail-biting story.
If it isn’t handled well, it can seem over the top, or it can begin to incur ‘reader fatigue’.
I think that in large part, the difference between tension on multiple fronts being handled well or handled poorly comes down to the stakes vs payoff of these situations, combined with the transition between narrative threads, and having these tensions resolved in a way that is satisfying.
Stakes vs payoff is about how the balance of what is being risked by the characters/ world, vs what stands to be gained, and then how the issue actually resolves. Is the risk being taken something that is worth the reward, or conversely, is the cost of failure bad enough to justify whatever situation the character has gotten into?
An example: When I was ten and reading Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, I found the early scenes where Harry and Ron take Mr Weasley’s car after missing the Hogwarts Express almost unbearable to read. I found the idea appalling: Mr and Mrs Weasley were still at the station, and undoubtedly as soon as an adult discovered that the two boys had missed the train they would have sent them on to the school some other way (via floo, for example).
In my mind, at the time, taking the car was a wildly unjustified leap of logic, and the act of stealing a car was vastly overreacting to the situation of having missed a train while adults are very close by and would be able to help.
In this case, for me, what was at stake for the characters in no way measured up to the risks they took to deal with the problem. When I read it now, I can see that it is meant to have a sense of adventure, and is also a course of action dictated by Harry’s lack of trust in adults in general, but at the time it seemed nonsensical and needlessly risky.
The takeaway is to consider whether any bold move that your characters make might be dealt with in a less risky way, and incorporate into the story reasons or justifications for why the characters choose the route that they do. It could be because your character is a habitual risk taker, or because they are literally blocked from taking other courses of action, as long as it fits the story you’re telling and makes sense, then it’s fine.
Transitioning between the narratives at moments of high tension is something I’ve mentioned in previous posts about multiple plot stories. It is important to build the conflict in the scene, but also to resolve some issues. In moments of high tension, however, a resolution often simply causes more conflict to spiral out of the situation.
A big situation where reader fatigue can occur is when it seems like the narrative threads are forever ratcheting up and no resolution is occurring, the reader is hanging off of three consecutive cliffs and their arms are tired, there’s no sense of progress, only of more and more chaos spinning out of control. This is where minor notes of resolution can help, if one small issue is pinned down, even while bigger problems balloon, it gives the reader some kind of foothold to help them get through the rough patches.
Keep in mind, each narrative thread will have major and minor conflicts occurring, and while many can come to a head at once, some must be resolved. Occasionally, these minor resolutions can be moments of humour, or levity in an otherwise bleak passage -- the presence of a small light makes the darkness seem all the darker, right? Well sure the villain is rampaging at full strength and the hero is struggling to work out how to do anything helpful, but at least she’s found the car keys she lost two chapters ago!
And finally, ‘satisfying resolutions’ doesn’t necessarily mean that things turn out the way the heroes hope they will -- it means that the narrative thread is resolved in a way that makes sense in terms of the logic of the world and characters, and that suits the theme and tone of the story.
The ending of Hamlet is satisfying, as the tragic narrative leads us through struggle and failure, to the death of the noble prince. The ending of A Midsummer Night’s Dream is satisfying as the comic narrative has led us through the trials of a group of young people and to their happy ending.
The protagonists will win some battles, lose some others, the antagonist will have some effect on the world, and to some extent that will linger even after their defeat (assuming they are defeated). The way that these outcomes are weighted should be influenced by the previous narrative, and the drive of the story. You don’t want your lighthearted comedy ending in a massacre, and you don’t want your dark and broody rumination on the nature of human folly to end with having a bunch of weddings and everyone will get along now!
Back to your original question:
It’s good to have parts of the story (the first climax, the crisis, and the climax, especially) where things are very tense and high stakes, these are the big moments of the book, and you don’t want to undercut the story by backing off at those moments, it’s fine for the readers to be white-knuckling at those points, as long as you give them the build up to prepare for it, and the denouement to catch their breath, that’s what those parts of the story are for!
