Today I have the pleasure of having Margot Kinberg guest post on the blog. Margot is a mystery writer (her newest, B-Very Flat has just been released.) But Margot is also a mystery novel expert—and I don’t use that word lightly. If you check out her blog, Confessions of a Mystery Novelist, you’ll see what I mean.
When people find out that I write novels, one thing they ask me is, “How do you make a book come out of your ideas?” “How do you put all those chapters together?”
Well, the fact is, I have a dirty little secret – I’m organized. You couldn’t tell if you looked at the contents of my purse (Oh, please, don’t do that!), but when I write, I am organized. Sometimes, that slows down the pace of my writing, and I am in deep admiration of my writer friends who just start writing and then write until the story is told. But that’s just not the way I think. So I use a story frames strategy.
Maybe it’s the educator in me, but I’ve always liked the idea of focusing on the story’s structure: it’s the backbone of a story, so to me, it needs to be strong. Story frames focus the writer on the way the story’s put together. In a way, it’s like the frame of a building. Once the frame’s in place, the writer’s creativity adds the wonderful architectural touches that can make buildings beautiful. To show you what I mean, let me, if I may, share the story frame I used when I wrote B-Very Flat.
The problem starts when…
Every good story has a problem, or a conflict. If the characters don’t have to deal with anything, there’s not much of a story, really. Umm…I’m a mystery novelist, so in my books, the problem is murder. So the challenge for me and other crime fiction authors is to figure out where the problem will begin.
This is a pretty important question, because it’s very often when the problem begins that the reader decides whether or not to take an interest in the book. There are a few ways to make a crime fiction novel interesting at the beginning. One of them is to have someone stumble upon a body. That’s a problem. The advantage of that frame for the beginning is that it gets the reader’s interest right away. Who’s the dead person? What’s the body doing there? Several excellent novels like Martha Grimes’ The Man With a Load of Mischief begin that way – with the finding of at least one body.
Another way to introduce the problem is to introduce the victim right away, and let the reader “meet” the victim and find out who she or he is. That’s often an effective way to give the reader clues about why anyone would want to kill the victim. This approach also allows the writer to build tension and suspense, since crime fiction lovers know that somebody is probably going to die in the book. Introducing the victim first also allows the writer to develop the victim’s character a little. That’s one reason I chose that approach for B-Very Flat. The victim in that novel is Serena Brinkman, a very gifted violinist who’s a student at Tilton University. I wanted readers to get to know her and find out a little about her family, friends and so on. With this approach, the problem begins as we see the interactions between the victim and other characters, and we can see the tension rising. That culminates with the victim’s death.
After that…
Since crime fiction novels center around a crime – often a murder – the “what comes next” part is usually the investigation of the crime. Of course, that leaves a lot of leeway for the writer. There are a lot of ways, for instance, to involve the sleuth in the investigation, and as long as a way is logical, the writer can be creative. Does the sleuth investigate because the victim is a friend, family member, etc.? Because the sleuth is in law enforcement? Because the sleuth’s been accused of the crime? The nice thing about crime fiction is that there are any number of ways that people can get drawn into investigating crime, so long as they make sense.
Since my sleuth, Joel Williams, isn’t in law enforcement any more, it wouldn’t have made sense for him to just start investigating Serena Brinkman’s death. In real life, that wouldn’t likely happen. Instead, I decided to have him involved through his academic status. Williams is a professor at Tilton University, so it would make sense for one of his advisees to consult him. That’s just what Serena’s partner, Patricia Stanley, does. When Serena suddenly dies on the night of an important music competition, her death looks accidental at first. But Patricial is convinced it was no accident, and asks Williams for help. Williams is a former police officer, so he has great respect for the local police, and no desire to “step on their toes.” He has several friends on the force, though, and is able to work with the police to solve the mystery of Serena’s death.
The problem is solved when…
This is one of the tricky parts about mystery novels. On one hand, in many of them, the sleuth solves the crime, the “bad guy” gets caught and is punished, and all is explained. Some crime novelists do that sort of ending very effectively.
The truth is, though, that life’s not really like that. People’s lives are changed forever when there’s a murder. Investigations can be hard on the sleuth, too. So endings that are too “neat” can present a problem. That’s why some of the finest mystery novels have “messier” endings, or at least endings where the characters don’t walk neatly and happily away from the murder. That’s also why I decided not to have everyone happy at the end of B-Very Flat. Of course, Williams does help to track down Serena Brinkman’s murderer. In that sense, the story has a “clean” ending. But the people in Serena’s life have to deal with her loss and the murder investigation, and this affects them.
So there you have it. I used this sort of story frame when I wrote B – Very Flat, and I found it very helpful. Story frames aren’t for everyone, though, and every writer has to make an individual decision about whether to use some sort of organizer.
The Pros of Story Frames
- They help keep the writer focused.
- They help with the daily discipline that’s required to write.
- They help the writer decide what needs to be in the story and what doesn’t.
- I’ve found they help to prevent writer’s block, mostly because they give the writer a direction.
- They are very useful for writers who can only write in short “dollops” of time. It’s easier to figure out what to write in the short amount of time one has.
- It’s much easier for the writer (and therefore, the reader) to follow along with the plot.
- Story frames help prevent “saggy middles” of stories. Everything that happens is part of the plot.
The Cons of Story Frames
- They can be limiting. If the story takes the writer in a new direction, especially a better direction, story frames can make that harder.
- Not every crime fiction novel fits a “typical” story frame. So if the writer is going to use a story frame, she or he has to choose a flexible frame.
- They can make a story too linear, and without enough depth.
- They can hamper creativity if they’re not broad enough. If the writer gets a terrific idea, and it doesn’t quite fit the frame, this can cramp the writer’s style.
- Drafting the story frame is not as interesting as writing the story is. Many writers would rather get on with the writing, and the frame can seem like an impediment. So….
- They can slow down the writing process.
In the end, every writer has to find for him or herself the most effective strategies for getting those wonderful ideas into final form. Story frames are just one way to accomplish this. They work for me, but that’s the kind of writer I am. Are you? Do you organize your work in some sort of structure like a story frame? If not, how do you focus your writing?
Clarissa – Thanks : ). You know, I think you’re right. One really does have to be organized, at least in some way, when one’s writing mysteries. As you say, you’ve got to start from the first page planting clues, making suspects look shady, and dragging those tempting “red herrings” across the path. That does take some planning.
Margot – great post (as usual). I have never used story frames or any method quite this organised but I can definitely see how this would help people work through their plot issues and have a functional story. Thanks for the great read and thanks Elizabeth for sharing.
I have never used story frames but I’m a very organized writer as well. I think most mystery writers have to be. Even if you know who the killer is, you need to make sure all the suspects in the book are looking somewhat guilty or else the reader will figure out who did it immediately. That requires planning. Great post.
CD
Thank you Elizabeth and espacially Margot from this splendid post!
I’ve been struggling with where the problem would start in my own story and written at least 6 different versions of Act I (ca. 20 000 words x 6). *phew*
Now, finally, I have a starting point, and LOTS of material to draw from :).
I, too, am rather organized because I have to have the happenings (also backstory) in order.
Think cause and effect.
So if this happens, what must’ve happened before *this* could happen? What happens after *this* has happened?
Who’s playing what part and gettting help from who. Who’s getting his/her nose rubbed by whom?
Who’s the killer and why didi he/she kill?
Without an outline, which I update as the story advances, I’d be lost in a black hole :).
This is the first time I hear of Story Frames. I’ll try to learn to use them.
I’m a pantser for my women’s fiction; but I’m experimenting with fantasy, and I think I need a PLAN to get past the researching-the-world phase. This sounds like interesting ideas that even I might be able to integrate into my vastly daunting project.
Thanks for the advice.
……….dhole
Cassandra – Story frames aren’t for everyone, but I’ve found it really useful to have some sort of structure. It just helps keep me focused.
Donna – I give you credit for trying your hand at fiction outside what you normally write. That’s not easy to do. I think a solid organizing structure can really be helpful when you’re trying something new.
Christine – Working backwards is another really interesting way to go about organizing! It sure does help in developing backstory, and it helps tie the threads of your story together. It makes sense, too. If your character does something, there has to be a reason. That reason leads to the backstory so that it all fits together. That’s a really helpful strategy.
Elizabeth, thanks for hosting Margot.
Margot, very informative post. You present some interesting ideas that would work with any type of writing. Very helpful, I need to be more organized.
Mason
Thoughts in Progress
Alex – Thanks. The funny thing is, I got used to framing as a part of academic writing, where organization is the watchword. If one uses it flexibly, it’s actually pretty adaptable.
Jan – Why, thanks. I have to say, I am in complete admiration of folks like you who are able to create characters and events like that – just writing them. There’s a lot to be said for telling the story and going back later to organize and revise. I think the reality is that each writer finds the way to write that works best for her or him.
Diane – You’re by no means alone. I know lots of writer-type folks who simply outline their stories. That can work really well, as it allows both flexibility and structure.
Mason – Thanks : ). That’s one thing I like about framing. It’s useful almost no matter what sort of writing one does. Well…I have to say I’m not sure it would work really well with poetry. Otherwise, I think it is pretty adaptable.
As usual, Margot, you’ve given me lots of things to think about. It must be nice to be so organized!
I don’t write mysteries, but the frame concept is interesting.
I’m weird I guess. I am totally without outline or even knowing who does what in my novel writing. I write the first draft as this intuitive hippy gal and then revise as an orderly systems freak. I like this frame idea and I would apply it after to see what it does to strengthen the plot.
Thanks for this – totally interesting interview!
I outline, but I never think of it as a frame.
Alan – Why, thanks : ). But organized isn’t always all it’s cracked up to be. Some people call it “obsessive-compulsive” ; ).
Stephen – Oh, I’m with you. I like readers get to know and feel something about the victim. Then, somehow, the murder and investigation have more impact, I think. And thanks for putting me on your blog roll – I’m flattered.
Elizabeth – Thanks so much for letting me “camp” here. You’re a very thoughtful hostess – just full of real friendship and hospitality. And I am truly honored to be on your amazing blog. I promise I’ll pick up my trash ; ).
I can’t imagine writing a mystery without having a plan. I need to know who dies, why and who did the deed. I need to know all the main suspects’ motives. I don’t plan every step of the journey, but I do have a fairly good map. However, that doesn’t mean I don’t get lost from time to time. Please send cookies.
Watery Tart – You are so right! Each genre (and for that matter, sub-genre) calls fo a different sort of planning strategy, doesn’t it? I can see why, for your writing plans, you’re thinking of Terry O’Dell’s post-it strategy, too. It’s flexible and adaptable. I confess I haven’t tried it, myself, but it’s certainly worth a shot. I really do think each writer finds a strategy that just, well, feels right.
Elspeth – Cooies are on their way. So is an emergency supply of chocolate ; ). I know what you mean about planning. That’s how I feel about writing, too. Because I write murder mysteries, I want to know who the victim, murderer and suspects are, what the backstory is, etc.. Of course, that doesn’t mean things can’t change; a plan at least gives one a compass, though.
Very good interview. I opt for the second way a problem starts, personifying the victim, allowing the reader to get to know them. Even like them. Then whack them good. Helps the reader to love to hate the bad guy(s) even more.
And I’m going to put Margot on my blog roll. Can’t believe I haven’t done that already. Have a great weekend all.
Stephen Tremp
Thanks so much for posting today, Margot! I love the idea of story frames, especially for mysteries. :)
Jane – Thank you : ). I have to admit I was happy with that name. I truly do admire folks like you who jump right in and tell your stories. I think you’re right that that approach is really well-suited for the kind of fiction you write. In fact, I think that’s one mark of writing talent – to know the style of writing that suits one’s genre and choose that approach.
I cannot really see myself using a story frame, but I have learned (through my mistakes) that I have to plan my manuscripts thoroughly. So I will do it much better from the start next time :D
Great to meet you here, Margot!
Dorte – It’s very nice to see you here, too : ). I, too, need to plan when I write. Otherwise my work just comes out mishmash; it really does. Story frames are not for everyone, but I think a lot of people feel the need for writing structure.
This was really interesting, Margot! I think genre makes so much difference in what works and what doesn’t. I normally write suspense, but am embarking on a cozy mystery and find the mystery needs much more careful pre-plotting because of the pace at which you want to feed readers the clues (and herrings) and expose the information. I’m thinking I might adopt Terry O’Dell’s post-it story-boarding approach because then it all gets IN THERE but you are free to move stuff around as it strikes you…
Marvin – Thanks for the kind words. It’s true. I am officially pathetic that way… ; ).
I’m another writer who jumps right into the writing with no sort of framework. My style of writing probably lends itself better to contemporary fiction which is what I write than to mysteries. By the way, I love the name of your newest book.
I loved the whole feature post, thank you Margot and Elizabeth, but this …
“I have a dirty little secret – I’m organized.”
LOL, how true and poignant that!
Marvin D Wilson
Cleo – Thanks for all of your kind words; I truly appreciate it! And you’ve shared some really helpful advice from Stephpen King; very useful stuff. You’ve got a well-taken point, too, that there has to be a happy medium between too much structure and a mishmash. I’ve been taking notes as I’ve read your response, because it sounds as though you’ve got a terrific strategy for that balancing act.
I think for authors of series, where some of the characters are familiar, it’s very interesting to see how those characters do when tehy’re they’re dropped into different kinds of situations. In my opinion, doing that well is part of the essence of a good series.
Again, thanks for the kind words.
Margot – I really enjoyed your post. I’m especially impressed with your spot-on list of pros and cons. In ON WRITING, Stephen King talks about the drawbacks of plotting out the entire book (as you’ve warned). This can certainly hamper creativity, stifling what might be a last minute exciting turn for the writer and consequently the reader. On the other hand, without a framing structure, any mystery novel will likely end up a bloody mess!
I think I’ve found a happy medium in your pros and cons list. I begin with characters that I know well, drop them into a situation, and see what they do. At the same time, as I move forward, I am mindful of planning out the sequences with framing and structure. It’s a back-and-forth kind of process for me. Organized (I hope) but with room for creative – again, I’m mindful of your pros and cons and try to end up in the happy middle!
I must add that I’m also looking forward to reading your book, which sounds fabulous. My heart has already gone out to your poor victim, and your experience in the academic world will certainly make the setting even more poignant.