The other major decision is the way the story is told. The obvious simplest way is a plain linear chronological recounting of the facts.
There is also the option to keep the first person and the basic story, but not necessarily stick to chronology, using digressions and flashbacks.
Another more cinematic way, would be to start the story today, with the main character now an 86 year old man telling the story to his great grand child. That would allow the introduction of elements of modernness in the story(the grandchild's iPod, WW2 video shooting games, etc...), and introduce a totally different persona for the main character, no longer just a child, but an old man having lived all those years since the story happened, and being able to reflect on things and tell other stories of his long life after the war. This could add a lot of pages to the book.
Yet another option would be to use multiple narrators, which would allow the retelling of some of the events with a totally different point of view, and the recounting of facts unknown from the other characters. That opens up a lot of interesting combinations and opportunities for psychological explorations.
Then there is the possibility of using an outside narrator, which opens access to all kinds of things and information that the characters didn't do, witness nor know about. It would certainly allow an expansion of the historical context, and an opportunity to delve into the political and social life of the period, from Leon Blum and the rise of the "Front Populaire" to Pétain and the regime of Vichy.
I am wondering, since after all this is only an experiment in writing and a learning exercise, whether to write the story first in the simplest linear fashion in the first person, and see later about eventually rewriting it differently...
There is also the option to keep the first person and the basic story, but not necessarily stick to chronology, using digressions and flashbacks.
Another more cinematic way, would be to start the story today, with the main character now an 86 year old man telling the story to his great grand child. That would allow the introduction of elements of modernness in the story(the grandchild's iPod, WW2 video shooting games, etc...), and introduce a totally different persona for the main character, no longer just a child, but an old man having lived all those years since the story happened, and being able to reflect on things and tell other stories of his long life after the war. This could add a lot of pages to the book.
Yet another option would be to use multiple narrators, which would allow the retelling of some of the events with a totally different point of view, and the recounting of facts unknown from the other characters. That opens up a lot of interesting combinations and opportunities for psychological explorations.
Then there is the possibility of using an outside narrator, which opens access to all kinds of things and information that the characters didn't do, witness nor know about. It would certainly allow an expansion of the historical context, and an opportunity to delve into the political and social life of the period, from Leon Blum and the rise of the "Front Populaire" to Pétain and the regime of Vichy.
I am wondering, since after all this is only an experiment in writing and a learning exercise, whether to write the story first in the simplest linear fashion in the first person, and see later about eventually rewriting it differently...
No comments:
Post a Comment